On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Bob Apthorpe moaned:
> ISPs don't need to charge customers for the privilege of unfiltered
> outbound port 25 access; all I ask is that they tell customers it's
> blocked and require them to specifically ask for it to be unblocked rather
> than give it to them unblocked by defa
Large Trout , perhaps?
>> So you say, " But" *WHAM* "ouch."
>> That was the point I slapped you with a fish ;)
>> --Chris
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software.
Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Managemen
relle Enterprises; Bart Schaefer;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamwriter
>
>
> Greg, please don't think that you know everything...
>
> SBC DSL FAQ states:
>
> Question:
> Can I run dedicated servers with DSL Internet access service?
>
>
Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises wrote:
> Most broadband users are not responsible enough to
> have the high speed connection,
I wouldn't say "most", but "a lot".
> but all this rant aside,
> 40 bucks a month does not make you an ISP.
Nope. But it's cheaper than good third-party hosting, and
- Cirelle Enterprises" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Bart Schaefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamwriter
| Making a direct outbound connection on port 25 is not "running an email
|
Yes but if you start comparing prices between companies that offer basic
no-frills consumer DSL as well as "business class" DSL where the only
difference is no blocked ports and maybe a handfull of IP's, you'll notice
Speakeasy's Residential no-frills consumer DSL with dynamic IP starts at
abou
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises wrote:
> From: Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:05:05 -0500
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamwriter
> To: Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:05:05 -0500, you wrote:
>Running any type of "Server" is a violation of every consumer high speed
>access connection TOS.
I don't want to beat this off-topic dead horse any longer than anyone else, but
I do want to point out the very excellent consumer high speed service S
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises wrote:
> Running any type of "Server" is a violation of every consumer high speed
> access connection TOS.
That's a rather sweeping statement.
> Call it what you want, but if it serves, it's a Server
"Serving" normally means "answers incomi
> No Hosting Servers
> No Email Servers
> No FTP Servers
>
> Just consuming.
My mail and web server generates about 10-20MB of traffic per month and is a
far far more secure connection than my neighbor's connection which generates
100+MB of outbound traffic per day playing online multiplayer game
a cable connection.
I think that was about a half a bucks worth
Best Regards
Greg
- Original Message -
From: "Bart Schaefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamwriter
| On Wed,
On Jan 14, 2004 at 20:05, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises wrote:
>The always on folks (sans a few) are mostly responsible
>for the proliferation of virus emails, spamming (with the
>now I can make money on the internet... so I can pay
>for this link so I can check my email at high speed mentalit
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises wrote:
> 40 bucks a month does not make you an ISP.
>
> No Hosting Servers
> No Email Servers
> No FTP Servers
>
> Just consuming.
Making a direct outbound connection on port 25 is not "running an email
server", any more than making a direc
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamwriter
| >
| > It's well known that filtering is *only* useful for keeping one's inbox
| > uncluttered; it does nothing to interdict the flow of crap from
| > upstream. You wan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 7:20 PM
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamwriter
| On Jan 14, 2004 at 15:57, Chris Santerre wrote:
|
| >I completely agree with this!! I've recently had a discussion off list with
| >some people. I tot
It's well known that filtering is *only* useful for keeping one's inbox
uncluttered; it does nothing to interdict the flow of crap from
upstream. You want to put a serious dent in spam? IDP broadband
providers that give their customers direct access to port 25 on remote
systems by default. Spam fro
On Jan 14, 2004 at 15:57, Chris Santerre wrote:
>I completely agree with this!! I've recently had a discussion off list with
>some people. I totally believe by DEFAULT this should be blocked for all
>broadband users. HOWEVER, this is ONLY if a simple request to unblock at NO
>charge is all it take
"Mike Batchelor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Why should I have to pay extra for a business-class DSL line just so I can
| avoid using the ISP's heavily clogged relay, when my own mail server can
| deliver my emails directly?
You have got to be kidding
Greg
Hi,
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Mike Batchelor wrote:
> --On Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:28 AM -0600 Bob Apthorpe
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > IDP broadband
> > providers that give their customers direct access to port 25 on remote
> > systems by default.
>
> Why should I have to pay extra for a
Chris Santerre wrote:
-Original Message-
(snip)
I completely agree with this!! I've recently had a discussion off list with
some people. I totally believe by DEFAULT this should be blocked for all
broadband users. HOWEVER, this is ONLY if a simple request to unblock at NO
charge is all i
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Batchelor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 2:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamwriter
>
>
> --On Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:28 AM -0600 Bob Apthorpe
> <[EMAIL
--On Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:28 AM -0600 Bob Apthorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IDP broadband
providers that give their customers direct access to port 25 on remote
systems by default. Spam from AOL dropped to almost nothing once they
did that.
Oh, one other thing - when did they do that?
--On Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:28 AM -0600 Bob Apthorpe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IDP broadband
providers that give their customers direct access to port 25 on remote
systems by default.
Why should I have to pay extra for a business-class DSL line just so I can
avoid using the ISP's heavily
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:48:00 +0100 Kristian Köhntopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please have a look at the article at http://www.jerf.org/writings/
> bayesReport.html from Jeremy Bowers. Jeremy has written a tool shown at
> http://www.jerf.org/images/spam.writer.full.png that assists in writing
Please have a look at the article at http://www.jerf.org/writings/
bayesReport.html from Jeremy Bowers. Jeremy has written a tool shown at
http://www.jerf.org/images/spam.writer.full.png that assists in writing spam
that does not trigger pure bayesian filters.
This emphasizes several points tha
25 matches
Mail list logo
