Are you going to sue him like you threatened to sue us in 2001 for
blacklisting you? :D
-Drew
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Dean Anderson
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 12:01 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: SMTP AUTH
Using SORBS
> C'mon folks... let's get back to the usual complaining about the size of
> the global routing table :)
Wow! A short message that only quotes the essential
points being responded to and doesn't leave pages of
irrelevant quotes following the poster's own words!
Amazing!
On Wed, 4 May 2005, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> No it's because you're off topic. Whether justified or not SORBS
> complaints and SORBS bashing are not on-topic for NANOG.
This is not particularly about SORBS bashing. Its about the need for SMTP
AUTH, whether SMTP AUTH sto
Dean Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 2 May 2005, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
Off topic again Dean...? Can't you keep on topic and keep the personal
attacks out of the list...?
Funny how its only off topic when its about your abuse.
No it's because you're off topic. Whether justified or not SORBS
; > DON'T, other than MUA-only programs like mailx and mutt with no SMTP
> > > support at all. When I worked at a mediumish sized hosting company with
> > > probably well over 100k mail users, I can't _ever_ recall hearing about
> > > a complaint of a custo
pport at all. When I worked at a mediumish sized hosting company with
> > probably well over 100k mail users, I can't _ever_ recall hearing about
> > a complaint of a customer using a mail client that didn't support SMTP
> > auth.
Where are all these ISPs requiring SMTP AUTH.
At 01:53 PM 5/3/2005, you wrote:
--
Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000
All this argument about a guy whose business website is a GIF, with 4 links
above it, 2 of which point to a machine that's refusin
On Mon, 2 May 2005, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> Off topic again Dean...? Can't you keep on topic and keep the personal
> attacks out of the list...?
Funny how its only off topic when its about your abuse.
> Dean Anderson wrote:
>
> >ignored. Then, in the fall of 2003, when the major open rela
nderson wrote:
>
> > But only 16 email clients (counting Netscape, Mozilla, and Firefox
> > separately), support SMTP AUTH. But there are more than 1000 different
> > email client programs.
>
> Firefox isn't an email client... maybe you're thinking of Thunderbir
Will Yardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are plenty of non-Windows mailers which support SMTP auth - the
> list below includes quite a few Mac OS, cross platform, and UNIX / Linux
> clients. Not only that, but on a *nix system, it's possible to configure
> the MTA a
>> does a better job. The following does very nicely for me, for the
>> record :-)
>>
>>> # Valley of the Kooks
>>>
>>> :0
>>> * ^(From|To|Cc):.*baptista@(pccf\.net|dot-god\.com)
>>> /dev/null
>>>
>>> :0
>>> * ^(From|To|Cc):[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> /dev/null
>>>
>>> :0
>>> *
>>> ^(From|To|Cc):.*(jim
i quoted somebody as saying:
> >> :0
> >> * ^From:.*<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> /dev/null
and was told by an actual procmail user the following:
> That regex needs some work (the left-angle bracket excludes messages sent
> with a bare address), and:
>
> > it does no good for me to filter out the
on Mon, May 02, 2005 at 01:55:19PM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
>
> in this interminable thread from hell, someone finally said the magic words:
>
> > Thankfully, there's always procmail.
>
> and helpfully gave a specific recipe:
Yeah, but not the one you really need. Thankfully, there's always mo
On 5/2/05, David Lesher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
> > http://palmsource.palmgear.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=software.showsoftware&prodid=44646
> >
> > Look at that, a PalmOS app that does exactly what you're looking for.
> > Doesn't seem
gnoring DNS TTL?
Y -[ 75: Dean Anderson ] Re: SMTP AUTH
< 25: "Patrick W. Gilmore"> Re: Slashdot: Providers Ignoring DNS TTL?
< 26: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
< 14: Matthew Sullivan>
< 84: "Edward B. Dreger&q
Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
>
> http://palmsource.palmgear.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=software.showsoftware&prodid=44646
>
> Look at that, a PalmOS app that does exactly what you're looking for.
> Doesn't seem to have been too difficult to find.
I looked at Snappe
On Mon, 2 May 2005, David Lesher wrote:
Well, if someone knows a program for the Treo 6xx that does
SMTP-Auth w/APOPI'm all ears... (& over SSL would be a big
plus...)
Let's see here... Google for "palm smtp auth"... first link... scroll
down a bit...
http:/
with
> probably well over 100k mail users, I can't _ever_ recall hearing about
> a complaint of a customer using a mail client that didn't support SMTP
> auth.
Well, if someone knows a program for the Treo 6xx that does
SMTP-Auth w/APOPI'm all ears... (& over SSL wo
Off topic again Dean...? Can't you keep on topic and keep the personal
attacks out of the list...?
Dean Anderson wrote:
ignored. Then, in the fall of 2003, when the major open relay blacklists
shutdown, open relay abuse JUST DROPPED OFF TO NOTHING. And when SORBS
started scanning, abuse picked
zilla, and Firefox
> separately), support SMTP AUTH. But there are more than 1000 different
> email client programs.
Firefox isn't an email client... maybe you're thinking of Thunderbird?
There may be lots of programs, but most / all of the ones that people
actually USE support SMTP a
Yes it is kindof amazing how well it works..
Unlike others on this list I have never claimed to have any credibility.
I am just a small time op.
Dean Anderson wrote:
Using SORBS? just how much credibility do you want to lose?
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 23:30
> Just be glad no one has set up a net kook DNSBL yet.
won't work. the trogs post to mailing lists. procmail is
my friend and could be yours. but i can't figure out why
otherwise seemingly sane folk keep replying to known kooks.
randy
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:11:35AM -0400, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:01:16AM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
> >
> > Using SORBS? just how much credibility do you want to lose?
> >
> > -- Forwarded message --
> > Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 23:30:00 -0400
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:01:16AM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
>
> Using SORBS? just how much credibility do you want to lose?
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 23:30:00 -0400
> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:
Using SORBS? just how much credibility do you want to lose?
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 23:30:00 -0400
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details
The original message was received at
On Sun, 01 May 2005 23:37:53 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> these either have 'Antique' tags on them or are painted National School Bus
> Chrome (National Bureau of Standards Color #1305)...)
Figures. Another reference says it's Standard 595a, Color 13432.. ;)
pgpfOZNJwJmJ7.pgp
Description: PG
On Sun, 01 May 2005 22:50:29 EDT, Dean Anderson said:
> But only 16 email clients (counting Netscape, Mozilla, and Firefox
> separately), support SMTP AUTH. But there are more than 1000 different
> email client programs. If you go to Microcenter, you can buy several
> email client
gt; DA>
> DA> Neither of these links actually work. But it is "Draft Standard". That is
>
> s,199,1999,
you need more than that:
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/1999-11/msg00289.html
I said:
"The SMTP AUTH RFC 2554 is standards track, but not standard
This seems like a new thread, so I changed the title.
inline
On Sun, 1 May 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 01 May 2005 21:09:50 EDT, Dean Anderson said:
> > criticisms (made presumably in 1999), were correct. In 2005, SMTP AUTH is
> > basically dead. There hasn&#x
Thus spake "John Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> seems that there are installs of the smtp-auth patch
> to qmail that accept anything as a user name and password
> and thus allow you to connect.
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=qmail&m=105452174430616&w
Margie Arbon wrote:
Check your mail logs campers.
You're joking, right? *headache just thinking about those logs*
-Jack
--On Tuesday, July 15, 2003 8:17 PM -0600 John Brown
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nope, I thought it might be operational in nature. ergo
spammers and others now scanning for qmail-smtp-auth patch
users and using those weak sites as a relay.
I think this *is* operational in nature. F
Yup, what he said.
yeah, all those lovely home based DSL/Cable/Wireless users with Linux/BSD
qmail-smtp-auth setups thinking they are safe and can relay off of their
nifty box at home / soho.
We
john
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 01:53:38AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 14
Nope, I thought it might be operational in nature. ergo
spammers and others now scanning for qmail-smtp-auth patch
users and using those weak sites as a relay.
the issue is that those sites will PASS the current "open relay"
check tools and thus not be BLACK LISTED.
Hey, what a co
On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 20:45:44 -0800, "W.D. McKinney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Did you mean to post this on the qmail list per chance ?
> On Mon, 2003-07-14 at 08:34, John Brown wrote:
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=qmail&m=105452174430616&w=2
Doubtful, he's *citing* a posting from an arc
John,
Did you mean to post this on the qmail list per chance ?
Dee
On Mon, 2003-07-14 at 08:34, John Brown wrote:
> seems that there are installs of the smtp-auth patch
> to qmail that accept anything as a user name and password
> and thus allow you to connect.
seems that there are installs of the smtp-auth patch
to qmail that accept anything as a user name and password
and thus allow you to connect.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=qmail&m=105452174430616&w=2
is one URL that talks about this.
There has been an increase is what appears to
37 matches
Mail list logo
