On 18-Jun-2003/09:09 +1000, Peter Kiem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi Brett,
>
>> what about the mail command? Doesn't it send directly to smtp servers?
>> It is only running for the time it takes to send the mail.
>
>OK granted, but you are sending emails to your relatives on AOL using the
>mail c
On 18-Jun-2003/06:38 +1000, Peter Kiem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Michael, Michael, Michael,
>
>> Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
>> directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
>>
>> All an SMTP Server does is follow the protocol but any hu
On 17-Jun-2003/16:36 -0500, Joseph A Nagy Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Peter Kiem wrote:
>> Hi Joseph,
>>
>>
>>>It's very safe to assume that, but it's not always the case. On occasion
>>>I've been known to pop open pine and send an email from there.
>>
>>
>> And pine does direct to remote SM
On 18-Jun-2003/07:35 +1000, Peter Kiem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi Jeff,
>
>> Sorry - no. there are literally over 30 programs capable of running
>> smtp protocol which are not servers and cannot be classified as MTA's
>> either. How is using these programs a violation of the TOS?
>
>I am not
On 17-Jun-2003/11:04 -0400, Drew Weaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Since you're probably violating your ISPs ToS anyway I guess it doesnt
>matter if AOL doesn't accept your mail.
An outgoing SMTP connection may not violate TOS. An SMTP server that
accepts incoming connections may violate the TOS.
- Original Message -
From: "Rodolfo J. Paiz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> At 6/17/2003 14:42 -0400, you wrote:
> >actua
> > After all a direct smtp connect is faster and and the protocol was
> > designed to allow it.
>
> Because it is abused and there is no recourse for the recipient.
>
> The fact is that 99% of email sent from DHCP addresses is SPAM! If you want
> to run a mailserver then do it properly!
Then se
At 6/18/2003 06:08 +1000, you wrote:
What protocol is used to send email? SMTP!
Where does your mail client use SMTP to? A SMTP ***SERVER***
Yes. That could be AOL's server directly, too.
For you to be sending out SMTP traffic directly to AOL you have to be
running some sort of mailserver so yes
> On 06/18/03 07:35 +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
>
> > > You and Drew are the ones playing semenatic games by trying to equate
> > > the use of SMTP to be equal to a server.
Drew gave up trying to rationalize with you a long time ago, gov'na.
-Drew
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:
On 06/18/03 07:35 +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> > You and Drew are the ones playing semenatic games by trying to equate
> > the use of SMTP to be equal to a server.
>
> OK, but will you admit that in 99% cases SMTP is sent from a server? In the
> vast majority of cases it is the ISP's mailserver
At 6/17/2003 16:26 -0500, you wrote:
3) Their tech support people are ultra-aggressive about keeping you as a
customer no matter WHAT. I was talked out of leaving TWICE before I told
them to fuck off (no seriously, I believe I told them the service is shit
and to literally fuck off). Even then t
At 6/17/2003 14:42 -0400, you wrote:
actually, alot of ISPs including one we resell dont allow you to even make
outgoing smtp connections unless you're going to there servers, and I know
that MOST if not all of the Broadband providers in the US for residential
service clearly state that you are NOT
Hi Jeff,
> Sorry - no. there are literally over 30 programs capable of running
> smtp protocol which are not servers and cannot be classified as MTA's
> either. How is using these programs a violation of the TOS?
I am not questioning the TOS. I am questioning the allowed use of SMTP from
dyna
Le 18/06/2003 04:58, « rm » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 21:30, John P Verel wrote:
>> On 06/17/03 16:23 -0400, Michael Kalus wrote:
>>>
>>> Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
>>> directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain
> Someone in this thread had asked whether there was a (simple?)
> sendmail configuration that would specify to send Email via one's ISP
> for destinations like aol, while going direct to others who might not
> be so "picky".
You need to use a mailertable. Something like:
.aol.com esmtp:your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Someone in this thread had asked whether there was a (simple?)
sendmail configuration that would specify to send Email via one's ISP
for destinations like aol, while going direct to others who might not
be so "picky". Or, I suppose, as more sites adopt
On 06/18/03 17:12 -0500, Bret Hughes wrote:
>
> Definitely going through something. Can you hit your aol friends/family
> now?
Yes. This fixed the problem.
Seems AOL got it right and I had it wrong.
John
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.co
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 10:02:08AM -0500, Ronald W. Heiby wrote:
> > Wednesday, June 18, 2003, 2:10:04 AM, T. wrote:
> > > Huh? No, the question is: Why the fsck where those guys able to get on
> > > board with the BOX CUTTERS?!?!
> >
> > Because no one had thought of box cutters as a threat.
>
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 10:02:08AM -0500, Ronald W. Heiby wrote:
> Wednesday, June 18, 2003, 2:10:04 AM, T. wrote:
> > Huh? No, the question is: Why the fsck where those guys able to get on
> > board with the BOX CUTTERS?!?!
>
> Because no one had thought of box cutters as a threat.
That's exactl
On 06/18/03 15:55 -0500, Ed Wilts wrote:
> Don't forget that you need to restart sendmail. Any time you regenerate
> sendmail.cf, you need to restart for it to take effect. Changes to the
> data files (virtusertable, access, etc) do not require restarts.
Yah, I forgot that at first :|
John
-
On 06/18/03 15:57 -0500, Bret Hughes wrote:
>
> Sounds right. it is still not going through your isp. Hav you made your
> change yet?
>
> Received: from John.optonline.net
> (IDENT:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [67.86.51.46]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id
> h5IJ10H25487 for <[EMAIL PROTE
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 03:02:38PM -0400, John P Verel wrote:
> Feedback from the Mutt list (as that's what I use) is to find the line:
> dnl define(`SMART_HOST',`smtp.your.provider') in sendmail.mc, change to
> define(`SMART_HOST', `mail.optonline.net'),
> remove 'dnl_' and run the Sendmail Macro
On 06/18/03 10:07 -0400, John P Verel wrote:
>
> On 06/18/03 06:42 -0400, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
> >
> > Not all mail cients include that capability.
> Correct. I use Mutt as my client, Sendmail to drop off to my ISP and
> Fetchmail for POP3. I have no problem with anyone except AOL
As a res
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wednesday, June 18, 2003, 2:10:04 AM, T. wrote:
> Huh? No, the question is: Why the fsck where those guys able to get on
> board with the BOX CUTTERS?!?!
Because no one had thought of box cutters as a threat. Before that
incident, I would routinely fl
On 06/18/03 06:42 -0400, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
>
> Not all mail cients include that capability.
Correct. I use Mutt as my client, Sendmail to drop off to my ISP and
Fetchmail for POP3. I have no problem with anyone except AOL
John
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PRO
> Hell if they are that poor an admin to be infected by worms
> that usually exploit OLD vunerabilities then HELL YES they
> deserve to be ignored on the Internet!
Those are home users, you know the kind that "just surf's the web" kind of
people.
Wasn't there a wrom going around the other day t
> If your dynamically assigned IP address is sending SMTP
> traffic directly to remote hosts on the Internet (instead of
> only to your ISP) then either you
> are:
>
> 1) Running a local SMTP ***SERVER*** on/behind that IP address
> 2) You are doing a LOT of telnets :)
3): I have a nice shellsc
> > So we have tons of people out there who have their windows machines
> > wide open and are getting infected by worms, maybe we should just
> > completely
> shut
> > those people off the net?
>
> Sounds ok to me.
Same for me. Maybe we should petition my ISP then?
>
> > My ISP has names asso
I don't have a static IP, but I have a static hostname. www.no-ip.com is
your friend. :)
- Original Message -
From: "Joseph A Nagy Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:27 PM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses
On 17-Jun-2003/21:58 -0500, rm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 21:30, John P Verel wrote:
>> I run Sendmail to deliver my mail to my ISP. Does this constitute
>> running a server?
>
>Well yeah, technically I guess it does.
No, it doesn't. At least not for the purposes of most IS
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 04:47:28PM -0500, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> Bret Hughes wrote:
>
> >It is analogous to spending 30 minutes in a security line at an airport
> >and having to check your pocket knife because of the terrorist activity
> >in our current environment.
> >
> >Bret
> >
> >
>
> S
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 21:30, John P Verel wrote:
>
> On 06/17/03 16:23 -0400, Michael Kalus wrote:
> >
> > Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> > directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
> I get this in response to telnet localhost 25:
>
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 21:30, John P Verel wrote:
> On 06/17/03 16:23 -0400, Michael Kalus wrote:
> >
> > Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> > directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
> I get this in response to telnet localhost 25:
>
> 2
Pretty much.
-Drew
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of John P Verel
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 10:31 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May
Be OT]
On 06/17/03 1
On 06/17/03 16:23 -0400, Michael Kalus wrote:
>
> Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
I get this in response to telnet localhost 25:
220 John.optonline.net ESMTP Sendmail 8.12.8/8.12.8; Tue, 17 Ju
- Original Message -
From: "Joseph A Nagy Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> Daryl Hunt wrote:
> > - Original Message
On 06/18/03 06:05 +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> > I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail. The only
> > "server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only. I do
> > not run any DHCP sofware on this machine. My ISP, Cablevision, does.
> > So, this AOL policy blocks A
Hi Brett,
> what about the mail command? Doesn't it send directly to smtp servers?
> It is only running for the time it takes to send the mail.
OK granted, but you are sending emails to your relatives on AOL using the
mail command?
What a masochist :)
> Now that I look at it it appears to call
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:18:06AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> OK that is fine but a large majority of spam is sent from dynamic IP
> addresses which are NOT open relays but just used to spew out millions of
> emails to the rest of us poor suckers.
>
In other words, ALL the ISP's you peer with are
Hi Joseph,
> Completely agreed, and your second option is very nice indeed.
>
> I just wish I could buy a static IP for less then $300/month!
Yeah I hear ya :(
Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^. | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTE
Hi Jeff,
> > Sorry John, no it doesn't. If you are on a DHCP assigned address then
you
> > should be relaying email through your ISP not directly out.
>
> Can you explain why a DHCP address shoud not do a direct SMTP connect
please?
>
> After all a direct smtp connect is faster and and the protoc
Hi Joseph,
> It's very safe to assume that, but it's not always the case. On occasion
> I've been known to pop open pine and send an email from there.
And pine does direct to remote SMTP email? Doubt it. Surely you had to
configure a POP3 and SMTP server in Pine so it knew how to send/receive?
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:10:52AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> > (my account has one static and 5 dynamic ip's). I use the static for my
> > business website, my mail server is on one of the dynamic ip's, and a
>
> Why don't you run your mailserver on the same IP as your website? Th
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:08:10AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> Jeff,
>
> > "server" being forbidden certainly appears in my TOS, but just being
> > smtp capable, incoming or outgoing does not a server make.
> >
> > Don't confuse the use of certain protocols with running servers. They
> > are not t
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:05:33AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> > I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail. The only
> > "server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only. I do
> > not run any DHCP sofware on this machine. My ISP, Cablevision, does.
> > So, this AOL
> Because eventually I want to run a web hosting/design business and I
> think it's cheaper to re-invent the wheel (you learn a helluva lot mroe
> too) then pay $300+ month for decent, reliable hosting (I say
> $300+/month because my company is also going to be hosting an extremely
> high band widt
Joseph,
> You awesome too much. For one thing, I don't run an MTA (nor a web
> server anymore due to the high CPU demand of RH9). But I do have
> relatives I might possibly be unable to email because of AOL's shit
> policy. I think it's very relevant.
If you don't run an MTA then how do you email
Hi Michael,
> > OK that is fine but a large majority of spam is sent from
> > dynamic IP addresses which are NOT open relays but just used
> > to spew out millions of emails to the rest of us poor suckers.
>
> So we have tons of people out there who have their windows machines wide
> open and are
> So we have tons of people out there who have their windows machines wide
> open and are getting infected by worms, maybe we should just completely
shut
> those people off the net?
Sounds ok to me.
> My ISP has names associated with all the IP addresses, those names are in
> return my customer I
ECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> > Add to that the people on dynamic addresses who THINK they know how to
set
> > up mailservers but don't have a clue about proper configuration and
Michael, Michael, Michael,
> Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
>
> All an SMTP Server does is follow the protocol but any human being can do
> the same thing, it's all plain text.
You miss my poi
> Chucks servers at moongroup.com were the first ones to bite me on this
> well over a year ago. I ended up routing everything through my isp
> (SBC) because IIUC my mailserver at the office on a machine called
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and masqueraded behind the static ip address
> of our firewall wou
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 03:25:06PM -0500, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
:
> >>They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
> >>current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.
> >Then by god get a new ISP.
> >-Drew
> Unfortunately I am without funds to do so. The cheapest DS
> Unfortunately I am without funds to do so. The cheapest DSL access
> (offered by local telco co-op) is approx. $30 more a month then our
> cable modem, otherwise I would (and be happily running websites off my
> box, or not, RH9 sucks up a shit load of resources)
>
In these scenarios I alway
> > I do run my own mailserver, it does NOT relay and if you try it you
> > get dropped with an error code, I had people try to use it
> as a relay
> > but even my own ISP only probes it and then went away when they
> > realized it was closed.
>
> OK that is fine but a large majority of spam i
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 04:21:35PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote:
> > I don't think they check for the reverse lookup matching the forward.
> > If they do, it will break way too many legitimate servers. They may
> > be bouncing mail with NO reverse lookup (I do that myself)
> Technically it is not legi
> Add to that the people on dynamic addresses who THINK they know how to set
> up mailservers but don't have a clue about proper configuration and
> security. This makes open relays and adds even more problems.
You'd be surprised what a MCSE does for people.
> Those of us that have to process TH
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 04:14:16PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote:
> Yeah, lets play the symantics game. If your computer is acting as a MTA,
> then you're running a SMTP server, thus violating the ToS of your ISP(in
> your case).
Ok... Let's play the semantics game. Your workstation can
> Jeff,
>
> > "server" being forbidden certainly appears in my TOS, but just being
> > smtp capable, incoming or outgoing does not a server make.
> >
> > Don't confuse the use of certain protocols with running servers. They
> > are not the same thing.
>
> What protocol is used to send email? SMTP
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:22, Daryl Hunt wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Drew Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:02 PM
> Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Address
> > They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
> > current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.
>
> Then by god get a new ISP.
Not always possible I guess.
FWIW, 8 static IPs on my DSL service cost $100 a YEAR!
It is worth shopping around.
Regards,
+---
> I don't think they check for the reverse lookup matching the forward.
> If they do, it will break way too many legitimate servers. They may
> be bouncing mail with NO reverse lookup (I do that myself)
Technically it is not legitimate unless the A matches the PTR record. No 2
ways about it.
> So
> For you to be sending out SMTP traffic directly to AOL you
> have to be running some sort of mailserver so yes you are
> running a server and in violation of your TOS.
Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plai
> >
> > What AOL should do is (if they really want to prevent spam)
> to go out
> > to
> the
> > mailserver that makes the connection and see if they can relay to
> > themselves, if they can then block it, if not let the mail
> go through.
>
> They use Reverse DNS Lookup just like the rest of
Hi Michael,
> I do run my own mailserver, it does NOT relay and if you try it you get
> dropped with an error code, I had people try to use it as a relay but even
> my own ISP only probes it and then went away when they realized it was
> closed.
OK that is fine but a large majority of spam is sen
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >>I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by
these
> >>days.
> >
> >
> > I bought mine.
>
> They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
> current ISP would cost me $3
> > Thats not true really, I am employed at an ISP and our Forwards and
> reverses
> > all match, and we have a /19.
>
> Let's not compare credentials here. It would be just a pissing match. You
> may think I am wrong but if you send your message to any of my servers and
> it bounced from AOL, it
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:42:53PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote:
> > actually, alot of ISPs including one we resell dont allow you to even
make
> > outgoing smtp connections unless you're going to there servers, and I
know
> > that MOST if not all of the Broadband providers in the US for
residential
Hi John,
> (my account has one static and 5 dynamic ip's). I use the static for my
> business website, my mail server is on one of the dynamic ip's, and a
Why don't you run your mailserver on the same IP as your website? They can
co-exist happily you know :)
Regards,
+-
Jeff,
> "server" being forbidden certainly appears in my TOS, but just being
> smtp capable, incoming or outgoing does not a server make.
>
> Don't confuse the use of certain protocols with running servers. They
> are not the same thing.
What protocol is used to send email? SMTP!
Where does you
> I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail. The only
> "server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only. I do
> not run any DHCP sofware on this machine. My ISP, Cablevision, does.
> So, this AOL policy blocks ALL Optonline subscribers from sending to any
> AOL c
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:44:48PM -0500, rm wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:23, Ray Abbitt wrote:
> > Sounds like they may be using the MAPS (Mail Abuse Prevention System)
> > DUL (Dial Up Listing). Most of the addresses on this list were
> > reported to the list by the ISP's responsible for t
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 12:58:14PM -0600, Daryl Hunt wrote:
Hi Daryl - please fix your email client: use one line for the
attribution, not four. (I know, MS-Outlook is a pain isn't it?)
>
> From: "Jeff Kinz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > John is quite correct here. AOl and many other large ISP's have
- Original Message -
From: "Douglas, Stuart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:07 PM
Subject: RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> I'm sorry to say I tossed the early posts on this
- Original Message -
From: "Drew Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> Thats not true really, I am employed at an ISP and our Fo
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> > When a reverse DNS lookup happens, it compares th
I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail. The only
"server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only. I do
not run any DHCP sofware on this machine. My ISP, Cablevision, does.
So, this AOL policy blocks ALL Optonline subscribers from sending to any
AOL customer.
ocols with running servers. They
are not the same thing.
>
> -Drew
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jeff Kinz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 12:30 PM
> Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses,
il convention so we can understand what
you are replying to.
Thanks. jeff.
>
> -Drew
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Daryl Hunt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:50 PM
> Subject: Re: AOL
or my edification?
Thx!
Stuart
> -Original Message-
> From: Drew Weaver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 06/17/2003 3:03 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential
> Addresses[May
> Be OT]
>
>
> Thats not true
ouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "John Nichel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 9:20 AM
> Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addres
- Original Message -
From: "Jeff Kinz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 10:20:55AM -0500, John Nichel wro
- Original Message -
From: "John Nichel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> Drew Weaver wrote:
> > Since you're probably vi
> When a reverse DNS lookup happens, it compares the dns with
> the IP number. If they are not matched, the mail bounces.
> Those on Dynamic IPs will bounce on ANY decent server.
Excuse me but that is not what should happen. What if the IP does not have a
DNS name associated with it?
I do run
[...] and I know that MOST if not all of the
> Broadband providers in the US for residential service clearly
> state that you are NOT to run daemons of any kind on their service.
So no IRC then for people on broadband?
What about things like Bittorrent? Not really a server but it definetly
"ser
- Original Message -
From: "Drew Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> Do you run a mail server on a DHCP address? this makes perf
their
service.
-Drew
- Original Message -
From: "Jeff Kinz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 10:20:55AM -050
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 10:20:55AM -0500, John Nichel wrote:
> Drew Weaver wrote:
> > Since you're probably violating your ISPs ToS anyway I guess it doesnt
> > matter if AOL doesn't accept your mail.
> >
> > -Drew
>
> Yes and no. I have a business account, and am allowed to run things
> such a
+++ Drew Weaver [RedHat] [Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:04:13AM -0400]:
> Since you're probably violating your ISPs ToS anyway I guess it doesnt
> matter if AOL doesn't accept your mail.
Running a mail server may be against your TOS, but sending email from your
local box directly most certainly is not.
Since you're probably violating your ISPs ToS anyway I guess it doesnt
matter if AOL doesn't accept your mail.
-Drew
- Original Message -
From: "John Nichel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:00 AM
Subject: Re:
M
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]
> Now if they could just stop messages from the inside
>
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/17/03 10:39AM >>>
> I've just gotten a couple of messages bounced back from AOL, indicating
Now if they could just stop messages from the inside
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/17/03 10:39AM >>>
I've just gotten a couple of messages bounced back from AOL, indicating
that they will not accept mail from DHCP addresses. They describe
them as "Residential" addresses (whatever that means).
Well, this would only "cut off" residential users who are running their own
SMTP servers. Would it not be possible to somehow forward all mail to
*.aol.com to your ISPs mail relay server?
-Original Message-
From: John P Verel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 June 2003 15:39
To: redhat
S
93 matches
Mail list logo
