If spam’s the word, would not a potentially viable solution based on peer-reviewed sender authentication or emailing “unaware zombies” as to what’s going on under their hood better suffice, a method superior to forcing customers to first independently discover and then typically adopt Comcast’s NSA-friendly SMTP channels? Hence the paranoia – any “spam” and traffic cure should better fit the symptoms. Opening client emails and spying for the federal government is apparently good for business, and stopping spam is laughable as implemented to date. If in-house SMTP is not intended as a better mousetrap for innocents and guilty alike, it may only be a bad way to blanket a real issue. Instead, it arouses a complacent public, tired of being spied upon or pushed in directions that make little sense, were not properly communicated, and thus spawn paranoia. The mules have never knowingly sent a spam message, bulk email, BitTorrent in either direction, or even automated confirmations or out of office replies – which makes their port 25 blockage offensive and suspicious – recycled floating IP assignation is bound to “catch” innocents.Įven if blocking port 25 does contribute to halting spam, it sure as hell doesn’t if the blocked parties are not spammers. In fact, quite a lot of spam comes from Comcast, which, if one is locked into their floating-IP system, is not a great way to stay visible to others. Spam has not exactly declined four years later. “We have commercial customers that aren’t spammers that we don’t want to impact,” Comcast’s Bowling said.Įarth to Comcast: so call or otherwise inform your clients before you go turning off ports. That’s ZDNet way back in June of… 2004? Wha…? The right approach is to seek out people who are spamming our network and others.” “We don’t think it’s the right approach to blanket port 25. “We are singling out spammers on our network and blocking port 25,” said Mitch Bowling, Comcast’s vice president of operations. Nothing very new is readily available on the port 25 issue, but, from the horse’s mouth: If your port 25 fails and you can send – but not receive – your email, here is a useful, step-by-step solution guide – it won’t entirely save you from alleged federal spies, but it is an alternative to using Comcast’s SMTP, their presumed intent. Who immediately imagines that Comcast would make a move this disruptive without notice?
The mules would have saved themselves time with Google in the quest for a remedy, but the problem was nuanced.
Want to use port 25? Please report to your local re-education centers. The host has had many, many calls on the issue. Per representatives of the server host, Comcast gently makes this hint knowing by turning off outbound client email. Instead, the claim was made that, as part of Comcast’s various peer-to-peer (P2P) and bandwidth limitation movements, Comcast is – sans warning – forcing an accelerating number of cable modem subscribers to use Comcast SMTP for outgoing email. Loss of outbound email service was not the data center’s fault. Two hours of billable data center admin and tech support later, the mules were much poorer. Foals and clients must be worried and waiting. Shivering masses of them, huddled together, begging to be delivered from evil. Must be the server farm lifting its tail.Īfter all, the mules are legitimate users and would not be randomly penalized by Comcast, and certainly not without some sort of notice or warning – right?
With a dedicated server or ten, the long-eared ones found it very odd that outgoing email was clustering undelivered in Outlook’s outbox. The mules finally got around to checking into precisely why, without warning, SMTP on port 25 was no longer functional in the middle of the night, which is when ambitious mules are working to pay for new barns and fresh hay.
0 kommentar(er)
