Mar 2004 14:09:56 -0500
Matt said something about Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Comcast Update:
Dave Doherty wrote:
Hi Matt-
click... click... click...
So here we go again. The old broken record.
If Comcast and RoadRunner blocked port 25, they would be down many
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 14:09:56 -0500
Matt said something about Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Comcast Update:
> Dave Doherty wrote:
>
> > Hi Matt-
> >
> > click... click... click...
> >
> > So here we go again. The old broken record.
> >
> > If Comca
Dave Doherty wrote:
Hi Matt-
click... click... click...
So here we go again. The old broken record.
If Comcast and RoadRunner blocked port 25, they
would be down many millions of messages per day.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. Blocking port 2
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 11:08
PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Comcast
Update
If my memory serves me right, there was a little more than
14,000 mail hosts identified in SenderBase for comcast.net exactly one month
ago. Guess what...
addresses.
Andrew 8)
-Original Message-
From: Matt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Comcast Update
Bull dookie, sounds like lip-service to me :)
Matt
Dan Patnode wrote:
Seems they're ac
So far, it's bull. After 1 week, my logs show no reduction in junk traffic
from ComCast reverse DNS addresses.
Andrew 8)
-Original Message-
From: Matt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Comcast U
a FROM:
and Sender: mismatch making it look like spam.
Hmm -- so, UNblocked port 25 with SMTP Auth would be the way to go so users
could send through the proper SMTP server to get a proper Sender: header
that matches the address they're sending from.
G
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:21:47 -0500
Matt said so
ding from.
G
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:21:47 -0500
Matt said something about Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Comcast Update:
> Not to start a big argument about the issue, but just to reiterate my
> stance on this...while blocking port 25 would work, it is unnecessarily
> prohibitive. If my provi
s about fixing the problem, that is.
-Dave
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Patnode" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:44 PM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Comcast Update
Seems they're actually aware of the probl
-Dave
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Patnode" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:44 PM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Comcast Update
> Seems they're actually aware of the problem:
>
>
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news
Bull dookie, sounds like lip-service to me :)
Matt
Dan Patnode wrote:
Seems they're actually aware of the problem:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/03/10/comcast/index.php?redirect=10
78943859000
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
T
Seems they're actually aware of the problem:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/03/10/comcast/index.php?redirect=10
78943859000
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe,
12 matches
Mail list logo
