«

Wave.co.nz is rejecting email being sent by Xtra customers who do not use
Xtra's SMTP server.

Lennier


--
I specifically DENY Xtra, and Telecom NZ Ltd, and all other subsidiaries
of Telecom NZ Ltd, the right to use the contents of this digital
communication for any purpose whatsoever, whether in whole or in part -
regardless of how it is stored or transmitted through Xtra's network.

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 13:25:18 +1200, Peter Huebner wrote:

> After shagging around a hell of a lot of time to no end I decided that
> the best thing to do is to simply set up a relay mail server at my end.
> Mercury32 is up at all times on my gateway machine now. I have the MerRi
> plugin daemon which takes Mercury from offline to online the moment an
> interface with the 'net is open; the rest of the time the smtp server
> accepts calls from the lan regardless and queues them for delivery when
> online. Perfect solution. Only thing I ever will have to change is where
> the relay server dumps its mail, as you describe above. All client
> machnes and client software are umtouched by any changes.

The only problem with this is.... I am not using ANY version of Windows on
my servers - they are Linux machines - and Mercury32 is a Windows
application. I need good (non-Microsoft) Linux solutions.


Lennier

--
I specifically DENY Xtra, and Telecom NZ Ltd, and all other subsidiaries
of Telecom NZ Ltd, the right to use the contents of this digital
communication for any purpose whatsoever, whether in whole or in part -
regardless of how it is stored or transmitted through Xtra's network.

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 10:08:04 +1200, R-Slicks wrote:

>>The only problem with this is.... I am not using ANY version of Windows
>>on my servers - they are Linux machines - and Mercury32 is a Windows
>>application. I need good (non-Microsoft) Linux solutions.
>
> What ??? The Linux world failing you now, Lennier ?

No - dumb ISPs who refuse connections from dialup IP numbers is what the
problem is.

And I didn't think I'd need to relay email when I should have been able to
send it directly to the relevant server.

Maybe POSTFIX or SENDMAIL can act as a relay - I just haven't explored
them that throughly yet.

Lennier


--
I specifically DENY Xtra, and Telecom NZ Ltd, and all other subsidiaries
of Telecom NZ Ltd, the right to use the contents of this digital
communication for any purpose whatsoever, whether in whole or in part -
regardless of how it is stored or transmitted through Xtra's network.

In article <pan.2003.07.10.13.29.10.946440@TRACKER>,
lid says...
> Wave.co.nz is rejecting email being sent by Xtra customers who do not use
> Xtra's SMTP server.

You mean Xtra customers who dial up on an Xtra connection, and try to use
Wave's SMTP server? It's called blocking relaying, and is
extreeeeeeemmmmmmeeeeeeelllllllyyyyyyyyyy common practice.

In article <pan.2003.07.11.06.54.24.603440@TRACKER>,
lid says...
> On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:28:41 +1200, Matthew G Brown wrote:
>
> > Actually many people do this . We do for 1
> >
> > Why ?
> >
> > It allows us to not receive mail from known dynamic netblocks , IE: Xtra
> > or WAVE's dialup ports. The theory is that if its Dynamic IP then it
> > shouldn't be sending mail and can use an upstream MTA. Many MTA's reject
> > mail for just this reason as dialup & cable connection make up a large
> > amount of the spamming hosts. \Note that this technique is virtually non
> > effective these days. Read about Dialup User Stopper at
> > http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/enduser.html
>
> Well it's nothing more than a pain in the neck. I have to post through
> Xtra's SMTP server only for my mate who's ISP is Wave.co.nz . Everyone
> else I can send to using my own server.
>
> I want to be as unreliant on Xtra's "services" as I can be - so that if I
> wish to change ISP I'd only have to alter settings on two machines.
> (the network server and the router)

So get another ISP

Mainlander wrote:
> In article <pan.2003.07.10.13.29.10.946440@TRACKER>,
> lid says...
>
>>Wave.co.nz is rejecting email being sent by Xtra customers who do not use
>>Xtra's SMTP server.
>
>
> You mean Xtra customers who dial up on an Xtra connection, and try to use
> Wave's SMTP server? It's called blocking relaying, and is
> extreeeeeeemmmmmmeeeeeeelllllllyyyyyyyyyy common practice.

I think you miss his point. Hes talking about the SMTP server RECIEVING
the email (wave.co.nz). Hes using his own SMTP server to send it.

The practice that wave are guilty of, is refusing connections from what
it thinks are dialup IP addresses. Whether they have sent spam or not.

The negative consequence of this, is that it moves the internet slowly
towards a situation where only big corporations are trusted, and the
individual user is not. Further centralising and commercialising the net.

Mainlander wrote:

>>Well it's nothing more than a pain in the neck. I have to post through
>>Xtra's SMTP server only for my mate who's ISP is Wave.co.nz . Everyone
>>else I can send to using my own server.
>>
>>I want to be as unreliant on Xtra's "services" as I can be - so that if I
>>wish to change ISP I'd only have to alter settings on two machines.
>>(the network server and the router)
>
>
> So get another ISP

I think you miss his point again. Its not his ISP thats at fault here,
its wave; the ISP of the indented recipient.

They are discriminating against dialup users, in effect saying only big
corporations have the right to send emails, and the little people are
all spammers. It insists that little guys have to ask a big corporation
to send his email on his behalf rather than directly.

Its of minimal advantage in the fight against spam, and a huge annoyance
for home users and small businesses that run their own SMTP servers.
Especially if their ISP is an IP only provider.

What wave is doing, is forcing such customers to pay for a third party
service to send email on their behalf, when they shouldnt have to, just
to satisfy the misguided ideas of a small number of ISPs.

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:54:09 +0100, Kurt Häusler wrote:

> The practice that wave are guilty of, is refusing connections from what
> it thinks are dialup IP addresses. Whether they have sent spam or not.

Their server, their ****ing rules.

When you pay Wave to operate their server then you can claim a right to
send mail to them. When you pay me to operate my server then you can claim
a right to deliver mail to me.

Otherwise you have access at the reciever's whim ONLY.

Xtra dialups are a common source of spam, it makes sense to refuse
direct-to-MX connections as a result.

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:57:34 +1300, Lennier
<> wrote:
>
>Wave.co.nz is rejecting email being sent by Xtra customers who do not use
>Xtra's SMTP server.
>
Why don't they just reject all email from Xtra like I do.

Cheers,

Cliff
--

The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
that the conspiracy is working.

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:48:49 +0100, "Uncle StoatWarbler"
<alanb+> wrote:

>On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:54:09 +0100, Kurt Häusler wrote:
>
>> The practice that wave are guilty of, is refusing connections from what
>> it thinks are dialup IP addresses. Whether they have sent spam or not.
>
>Their server, their ****ing rules.
>
>When you pay Wave to operate their server then you can claim a right to
>send mail to them. When you pay me to operate my server then you can claim
>a right to deliver mail to me.
>
>Otherwise you have access at the reciever's whim ONLY.
>
>Xtra dialups are a common source of spam, it makes sense to refuse
>direct-to-MX connections as a result.
>
Lennier's server may not reverse resolve as well.

Cheers,

Cliff
--

The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
that the conspiracy is working.