On 6/29/05, Matthew S Elmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Probably because a very high percentage of spam comes from comcast IP > space. Their customer base is completely clueless. If someone is
Just because I have comcast doesn't make me clueless. Trust me, I'd go with another provider, but they are the ONLY cable internet provider in the baltimore area, and the price to bandwidth ratio is better than dsl, as the fastest dst I can get is under 1mbps. > complaining, tell them to send through a non blacklisted SMTP server. So just because I'm too poor to get a colocated server, if I want to run my own mail server, I'm just shit out of luck? That seems unacceptable to me. The ability to run an email server shouldn't be in direct relation to how much money I make, which I thought was part of the point to OpenBSD, free. Any residential ISP will have customers that have no clue, because most people just don't need (or feel they don't need) to know much at all about computers, but I shouldn't have to suffer because of their ignorance (and yours). > That IP space is in the list for a reason. Because almost everyone (not just us stupid comcast customers) has made spam profitable, so it has now flourished. If people didn't make spam profitable, it would go away. Education is a much needed step, but it seems you would rather shut us dumb comcast customers off from the internet and wash your hands of it. > > On Jun 29, 2005, at 12:23 AM, eric wrote: > > > Has anyone notice a huge amount of problems with spamd(8) and > > Comcast/ATT > > Worldnet Service mail servers? Seems that things like 204.127.198.34, > > and > > almost everything in 204.127 is in spews1. > > > > If anyone has a way around this (to only greylist the poor souls that > > use > > comcast), please lemme know. I'd love to continue using spews[12], but > > too > > many people complain. > > > > Thanks. > > > > - Eric
