|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi List,
You can check whether "your" IP (if you get assigned a "permanent" one
by your ISP) is in some "realtime block list" (RBL) via the following
URL:
http://www.openrbl.org/
Don't know if/which of those RBLs eskimo is using, but Mark's IP seems
to give a positive in 2 RBLs. As explained, the more "strict" RBL
maintainers block all non-permanent IP address pools pre-emptively, as
the spam issue has gotten completely out of hand the last 6-9 months.
The IMMEDIATE fix for Mark or anyone in a similar position, is to just
relay his outbound SMTP via his upward ISP, ie SWBELL, which isn't in
ANY RBL.
If ESKIMO wants to override their RBLs to make an exception for MarkB,
they can add Mark's IP in their sendmail's "local" access file, which
takes precedence over whatever RBL server they are using.
Regards, M
Mark Brown wrote:
>
> Hello List,
>
> LM> Eskimo has not changed its configuration recently.
>
> yes they did saturday i called them via toll free number and the lady
> verified it that because of recent spam they banned the richardson
> blocks as it remains this day i just tried to post and i am still
> blocked. 67.64.132.234
>
> LM> They do block connections to its mail servers from client-side
> LM> broadband IP addresses, as do most responsible ISPs. What this
> LM> means in layman's terms is that you can't connect your home (or
> LM> office) computer's email client directly to eskimo's mail
> LM> server---you instead must route your outgoing mail through your
> LM> ISP's relay server, Most of you do this transparently as part of
> LM> whatever you did when you set up your email account with your ISP.
>
> but what happens when you are your own isp like i am? that would be
> the equivalent of me demanding that ESKIMO.COM use only SPRINTLINK.NET
> as a mailer. they get their bandwidth from Sprint like I do as well I
> get it from SBC. this is really stupid and not common practice.
> ISP's should at least ban on dnsbl blacklist and relay list but not
> take it upon themselves to take a pot shot at zillions of IP blocks.
>
> LM> What "changed" last Saturday is that for some reason Mark tried to
> LM> make such a connection, and received the standard denial SMTP notice.
>
> no i have not changed anything on my end for years now.
>
> >> Mr. Admin Eskimo.com got spammed by someone in my area "a really big
> >> area" so he decided to block and entire region of the country.
>
> LM> The block was not in response to any specific spam; it's standard
> LM> practice to block client-side connections. To allow such connections
> LM> would be an invitation to spammers, so they're generally blocked
> LM> preemptively.
>
> if you hang out in the news group news.admin.net-abuse.email you will
> see that recently ESKIMO.COM banned all hotmail.com accounts also.
> they have no clue how to properly block so they are just grouping
> everyone together and banning everyone. STUPID STUFF THIS METHOD.
>
> >> So until someone can reason with Eskimo.com to white list my STATIC
> >> IP's all kinds of weirdness can be expected.
>
> LM> Eskimo DID whitelist your IP; I was copied on several emails from the
> LM> owner to you explaining that he had, in fact, put you on the
> LM> whitelist. I know you received those emails, because you quoted them
> LM> in subsequent invective directed back at Eskimo. He certainly cut
> LM> you more slack than I would have after your flood of abusive language.
>
> AGAIN check with the nut I am still blacklisted as of today
> 67.64.132.234 this should never have happened. you ban the spammer
> not the world.
>
> LM> Jim
> --
> Thank You,
> Mark Brown
> www.markbrown.com
|