n
Verizon Internet Services Operations
Security and Legal Compliance
--
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 2:24 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Charles Sprickman
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 7:29 PM
> To: Dennis Dayman
> Cc: Nanog
> Subject: RE: Verizon Postmaster contact?
>
>
>
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Dennis Dayman wrote:
>
> > I am working on the issue(s) now.
>
>
Charles Sprickman writes on 11/3/2003 8:29 PM:
Anyone else want to dig around for VZ deferrals?
You mean their 4xx'ing all mail that you send them?
thenose.net is Dennis' personal domain btw - that's not hosted by Verizon.
--
srs (postmaster|suresh)@outblaze.com // gpg : EDEDEFB9
manager, outbla
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 2:24 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Verizon Postmaster contact?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > I see VZ was not kind enough to put any co
hell, Esq.
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 2:24 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Verizon Postmaster contact?
>
>
>
>
> > I see VZ was not kind enough to put any contact info in Jared's NOC
> > list. They are currently blocking all mail from an ISP cu
> I see VZ was not kind enough to put any contact info in Jared's NOC
> list. They are currently blocking all mail from an ISP customer of
> mine (based on the envelope From, not IP), and I need to get someone
> on the phone to clear this up.
Verizon is listed in EDDB; I think that I've made th
Bob German writes on 11/3/2003 2:54 PM:
My understanding is that they started breaking the RFC by refusing mail
with null <> senders last week.
Based on past experience, I wasn't too surprised.
Doesn't look like they are doing this.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 01:31:15 [~]$ dnsmx verizon.net
0 relay.verizo
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Bob German wrote:
>
> My understanding is that they started breaking the RFC by refusing mail
> with null <> senders last week.
>
> Based on past experience, I wasn't too surprised.
Heh.
Doesn't seem to be that:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] telnet relay.verizon.net 25
Trying 206.46.170
My understanding is that they started breaking the RFC by refusing mail
with null <> senders last week.
Based on past experience, I wasn't too surprised.
-bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Charles Sprickman
Sent: Monday, November 03,
