[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?

Here is some helpful info;



WARNING!  Blatant flame ahead!  Danger Danger!

The real problem is that you are a second class Internet citizen because you don't have a "business class" service, which means a T1, E1, or greater.

Angry?  Good, you should be.  I am.

I have similar problems with mail servers that do reverse DNS SMTP session checking. Short of paying for a T1 at $800 USD a month, there is no way that I can get an IP allocation with reverse DNS delegation so that I can make my mail server's MX record match up with the PTR record.

I live in a major metropolitan area with over 1.3 million inhabitants within the United States, and I can't get an ISP to give me an IP allocation unless I blow major money for "business class" service. As Jesse Jackson would say, "It's a grrrrrrave injustice!" =)

I am fortunate enough that my ISP's DHCP lease is very stable, the netblock is not marked as a Dial-up/DSL/Cable net, and they do not perform any port filtering. Unfortunately, my ISP's staffers are brain dead and don't even know what reverse DNS delegation is. Hell, even their own MX record does not match up with their PTR (orlandotelco.net). They probably suffer from the same problem that I do. How funny and yet maddening.

Reverse DNS checking for SMTP sessions is a good idea in theory, but in practice, it just makes you a Bastard Operator From Hell (BOFH) and gets you false positives for spam filtering.

Anyway, pardon my rant.

Chris Evans wrote:
What a horrible question?!

Situation: I have run a postfix/spamd-SA/RAV/ecartis based Email list service (confirmed opt in, never redistributed a spam in some years now). It runs off a box at home through British Telecom broadband and is low volume (the lists concern psychotherapy and psychotherapy research: my day job, and are run for some charities). Since 22.vi.03 AOL have started refusing my smtp traffic (with a 4.0.0 message so I didn't find out for some days). Netscape are doing same. Turns out when I finally get a British Telecom supervisor on the phone to complain that I get no response to my complaints to them by Email, that AOL are moderately well justified in doing this because it seems that BT ran open relay for some time (he says not since last November which sounds untrue but even that seems unbelievably stupid). Since mine is a BT IP address I'm blocked and I would be if I relayed through BT's server. (Though they'd like to charge me more for the priviledge of doing that now they've understood relaying and clamped it down -- rightly -- 'cos they do it by domain name as well as IP address and ... aargh .... you get the picture).

So I'm looking for a Debian (since I like Debian!) ISP, ideally in the UK, who would be willing for me to relay for psyctc.org, atprn.org, atprn.org.uk (all on, coming out through 198). I've got a shorewall firewall, RAV scanning for virii (but probably ditching that something else now they've joined M$!) and spamd-SA-razor doing antispam and loads of other antispam from postfix. Total traffic is 682k messages out in just under a year according to mailgraph, it says max ever was 1012 mssgs/min and mean 1.6 msgs/min. Most are very small, basic Email list traffic. My own traffic contains occasional large (16Mb record I think) stats and presentation files.

Not a lot of money for this as I do it as a gesture for the charities but I am willing to pay something if anyone is willing and will quote me. I can either relay everything or just aol & netscape for now. I will take relaying out if things settle down.

Anyone willing to offer, please contact me off list: chris@psyctc.org.


PSYCTC: Psychotherapy, Psychology, Psychiatry, Counselling
and Therapeutic Communities; practice, research, teaching and consultancy.
Chris Evans & Jo-anne Carlyle
http://psyctc.org/ Email: chris@psyctc.org

# Jesse Molina
# Mail = jesse@opendreams.net
# Page = page-jesse@opendreams.net
# Cell = 1.407.970.0280
# Web  = http://www.opendreams.net/jesse/

Reply to: