Could you please tell me if we have some mailing list ready to organize
some kind of struggle against this kind of insanities which are starting
to plague the internet?
I don't know of one. I think it is a worthy cause, but I am
overloaded already so I cannot take the lead here.
People need to express their views in other situations--when a site
decides to *use* mail-abuse.org and block mail from dynamic sites.
Is Debian doing anything like this?
Could you please tell me if we have some mailing list ready to organize
some kind of struggle against this kind of
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 12:54:01PM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
Roberto Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not
send mail anymore so every guy in the internet will have to depend
upon a third-party mail relay to send mail.. whats the
That's a pretty valid point Roberto.. That is why I learned how to use/build
radio! I see more and more of this repression censorship everyday. I
shudder to think what it is like for our debian brothers and sisters in
nations where you can't legally even surf the internet for NEWS! It will
Alan == Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alan Gary Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do they? I can name at least one which may not (depending on the
tarif you choose).
Alan If you have an ISP who doesn't provide a mail server for you but
Alan provides you with a DUL-listed IP,
Alan == Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alan The usual response to this is
Alan Your ISP gives you a mailserver through which to relay mail. Set a
Alan smarthost and get over it.
Alan Why isn't that sufficient for you?
This seems a particularly naive world view. Not every
Remi == Remi Lefebvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Remi Your ISP hopefully provides a relay for your outgoing mail,
Remi which relay accepts your mail based on your IP (should accept
Remi only mail from its clients). Why can't you use that one ?
The operative word is hopefully. There
I don't like this either. However, I don't think that expressing
anger at whoever runs mail-abuse.org will be effective. He is not likely
to listen to us.
People need to express their views in other situations--when a site
decides to *use* mail-abuse.org and block mail from dynamic sites.
Is
I am sending this here because according to mail-abuse.org I and the whole
dynamic dns users are spammers just because we are using dynamic ip's.
I want all the debian mail relay's administrators be very aware about
this.
They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not send
And I insist that what you are doing with dynamic ip's has a
name.. FASCISM.
Sorry very much but this is the true.. spammers always will find
a work-around since they have nothing better to do with their lifes.
By blocking the whole dynamic segment of the internet you are
not a solution
Roberto,
Your IP is listed in the DUL list because it is in a dynamic IP range. There's
nothing to whine about there since it really does belong in that list.
The point to argue about is whether it is wise for relays to block based on
the DUL. My personal opinion is its an inneficient way of
Roberto Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not
send mail anymore so every guy in the internet will have to depend
upon a third-party mail relay to send mail.. whats the next?
The usual response to this is
Your ISP gives you a
If you absolutely want to run a real server, geez, get a real connection.
I was using ddt for mail.. and for nothing else.. if you dont want me to
use it.. OK but dont lie.. in your site you had specific instructions
about how to run a mail server using ddt.
Now I really dont advise anybody to
Your ISP gives you a mailserver through which to relay mail. Set a
smarthost and get over it.
Why isn't that sufficient for you?
I am telling about a principle.. nobody should put the entire dynamic
internet segment into a black list..
Why isn't is this sufficient for you?
Regards
Roberto Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am telling about a principle.. nobody should put the entire dynamic
internet segment into a black list..
Why isn't is this sufficient for you?
Because the Internet has changed, and most people either don't care
about the DUL, or think it's a good
Hi,
Ok, let's that get everything clear.
DDT provides DNS services. Not mail services. However, there's a relation
between mail and DNS as far as mail routing go (read about MX records for
more). We do not provide any kind of SMTP services for DDT users whatsoever.
Now, why would someone want
The problem you are having, Roberto, as nothing to do with DDT but with
you being on a dynamic connection. The truth is a static connection is
much better suited for servers, but it is possible to run a server on a
dynamic connection (much more affordable). One downside is some people
will
Just citing a principle is _not_ enough to change the MAPS folks'
minds. That's why it isn't sufficient for me.
So do you think is ok to treat to put the complete dynamic ip segment into
a black list?
Maybe is because I am getting old,, but in the 80's (when I was
young) this would have been
Thank God for procmail!
:0
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/dev/null/
Bye
Glyn M
Dont thank God for being such a coward..
Thank God for procmail!
:0
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/dev/null/
Bye
Glyn M
Regards
Roberto
Roberto Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://vivaldi.dhis.org
Powered by GNU
On 3 Apr 2001, Alan Shutko wrote:
Roberto Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not
send mail anymore so every guy in the internet will have to depend
upon a third-party mail relay to send mail
[..]
Your ISP gives you a mailserver
Roberto Diaz wrote:
I am sending this here because according to mail-abuse.org I and the whole
dynamic dns users are spammers just because we are using dynamic ip's.
I want all the debian mail relay's administrators be very aware about
this.
can't win it all. the amount of spam blocked by
Gary Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do they? I can name at least one which may not (depending on the
tarif you choose).
If you have an ISP who doesn't provide a mail server for you but
provides you with a DUL-listed IP, that's your fault.
--
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of
Gary Jones writes:
Do they? I can name at least one which may not (depending on the tarif
you choose). They might provide a newsserver as well, but it doesn't mean
you are forced to use it, either to read or post.
This is true. You can contract with anyone you want to for either news or
mail
Nate Amsden writes:
ISPs don't take the responsibility most of the time to restrict outgoing
mail to their servers(ive worked at a few so i know this from the
inside), dynamic ips should NOT be allowed to send mail, there should be
stuff in the router or firewall or whatever to prevent this.
If you have an ISP who doesn't provide a mail server for you but
provides you with a DUL-listed IP, that's your fault.
Please.. there are a lot of combinations.. a lot of countries a lot of
realities.. you can have no chance to choose a ISP who provides you
SMTP/POP and is not your fault..
Roberto Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Think for example in a lot of third-world countries maybe in some places
they could be using dynamic DNS as the only way to have multiple e-mail
for everybody in a small village.. they maybe only can afford a dial-up
connection...
If you find an actual
Roberto Diaz wrote:
By blocking the whole dynamic segment of the internet you are
not a solution anymore but a part of the problem.
I have no idea why you cc'd this email to debian-user, since Debian does
NOT rely on the DUL as part of our spam-blocking setup.
Of course, I don't know why you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I invoke Godwin's razor and declare this thread dead! Fascism has been
mentioned, EOT.
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Roberto Diaz wrote:
And I insist that what you are doing with dynamic ip's has a
name.. FASCISM.
Sorry very much but this is the true..
I have no idea why you cc'd this email to debian-user, since Debian does
NOT rely on the DUL as part of our spam-blocking setup.
Because there are some human beings here.. people who are ready to fully
understand the stupid and dangerous of using DUL.
Just think.. you only have to break the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Godwin's Razor has been invoked: second warning.
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Roberto Diaz wrote:
I have no idea why you cc'd this email to debian-user, since Debian does
NOT rely on the DUL as part of our spam-blocking setup.
Because there are some
If you find an actual case like this, I'd bet that MAPS would take
that range off the list.
I bet we will never know.. thats always the case with poor people nobody
wants to know about them.
But you won't be bothered by reality, since you care about the
principle of the thing.
Principles
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 12:54:01PM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
Roberto Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not
send mail anymore so every guy in the internet will have to depend
upon a third-party mail relay to send mail.. whats the
33 matches
Mail list logo
