> They blocked at least my non commercial mail server until I added an
> impressum. So, I guess they now block everyone without an impressum.
My private Mailserver never ran into problems delivering to
@t-online.de recipents. And there's no impressum for it -- not
even a matching web server.
Speaking with my micro-ISP business hat on:
Yepp, we routinely have to contact t...@rx.t-online.de
whenever we install a new mailserver for a customer. They
always react swiftly, so it isn't too much of a bother for
us. In many cases, we provide just the mail service, and
any "impressum" page is completely inaccessable or unrelated
to us.
I fully acknowlegde the "our server, our rules" point of view
of T-Online/Deutsche Telekom, and I think their rules are, all
in all, pretty reasonable.
Still, I *am* a certainly worried by this kind of business practice,
exercising dominant market force unto everybody (commercial or not),
and making life difficult in particular for non-commercial end users
running their own mail server. I am not so much worried about
T-Online in particular but the emerging consolidation to just a
few giant players in the market (incumbents, GMAIL, O365, ...).
So, what about running your own, private mail server?
The German "Telekommunikationsgesetz" ("TKG") is the relevant law
here just for *commercial* telco/network providers, i.e. it
applies Hetzner and T-Online, but not really the Hetzner user.
Yet, the TKG aims to prevent overwhelmingly dominant players and
unequal access to the market (and "communication" in general).
Until recently the TKG explicitly mentioned the "end user", in
addition to and independently of any commercial provider, as having
protected rights within the market, even as a non-commercial
participant. This end user reference got dropped in 2021 with the
last major TKG revision, an alignment with new, EU-wide umbrella
regulations. These now also contain the "net neutrality"
regulations, previously part of the TKG itself.
Assuming that tosa@ reacts in a better way to the original poster
than the referenced standard information sheet, the issue might be
resolved the easy way.
If not, and only then, the Hetzner user has a point to make this
an issue with the national regulator ("Bundes-Netz-Agentur")
which is supposed to enforce the TKG and uphold a fair market.
This (</de>) should be a good starting point:
https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Vportal/TK/InternetTelefon/Netzneutralitaet/start.html
Do not get too hooked on the word "net neutrality" -- it is extremely
multi-faceted and mostly used in a different sense on the BNetzA
pages. More on that below.
The BNetzA *is* open to end users, but I'd recommend to do this
jointly with the affected provider, in this case Hetzner. After
all, the Hetzner user will have to argue that T-Online is pushing
a problem on both him/her and Hetzner that both cannot reasonably
resolve together. That is, the sending user should not complain
against his provider (Hetzner) but along with him, and against a
3rd party (T-Online). (This is a bit unusual because the BNetzA
usually sees its role as a consumer protector, protecting a user
from his own, mis-behaving provider.)
If Hetzner refuses to assist in this matter... well, vote with
your feet.
Making a case won't be easy, I guess. The BNetzA has routinely
rejected complaints about blocked emails from (non-) recipients,
against their own, blocking provider.
The BNetzA argues that such complaints have no merit with them
because "email" works on the application layer, above any layers
governed by the official "net neutrality rules", and apparantly
that's all they care for.
I am absolutely baffeled by this reasoning. In particular because
they cite the relevant "traffic management" passage from the EU
regulations, and I fail to see any relationship to layers in there.
Better read for yourself, here are the links:
Regulation (EU) 2015/2120, "measures concerning open internet access":
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32015R2120
Pick the language of your choice and head to Article 3, "Safeguarding
of open internet access", and in particular 3.3.
The most recent BNetzA report on complaints (sorry, </de> again):
https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Sachgebiete/Telekommunikation/Unternehmen_Institutionen/Netzneutralitaet/Netzneutralitaet_Jahresbericht%202021_2022.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1
See pages 9+10, "Keine Anwendbarkeit der Verordnung", "23. E-Mails"
I am afraid that, with this viewpoint by the BNetzA, their alleged aim
"Wahrung der gleichberechtigten und diskriminierungsfreien
Behandlung des Datenverkehrs bei der Bereitstellung von
Internetzugangsdiensten und damit verbundener Rechte der
Endnutzer zu schaffen"
(briefly, "protect the discriminatory-free traffic for the
access of end-users to services")
is a lost cause.
Martin Neitzel
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
