Re: [OT] was SORBS

Lee Dilkie wrote: > First, I'd like to point out that not everyone has the option of > changing ISP's. Believe it or not, there are many folks who have only > one choice for high-speed internet access (myself included). The choice of ISP for your client connection is unrelated to the choice of ISP

Re: [OT] was SORBS

- Original Message - > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 16:50 +0100, Nigel Frankcom wrote: > > > We're on a BT only exchange here so it's them or nothing, well not > > quite, I could go CoLo... hmmm maybe not, or satellite, I was > > involved in setting that up in Cyprus. > > > Nigel > Is there suc

Re: [OT] was SORBS

corpus.defero wrote: > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 21:09 +0200, Per Jessen wrote: >> corpus.defero wrote: >> >> > 2. No mail server rejects based on SORBS. It rejected where admins >> > choose to implement SORBS at an SMTP level. >> >> Same thing. >> >> >> /Per Jessen, Zürich >> > Key point is the

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 21:09 +0200, Per Jessen wrote: > corpus.defero wrote: > > > 2. No mail server rejects based on SORBS. It rejected where admins > > choose to implement SORBS at an SMTP level. > > Same thing. > > > /Per Jessen, Zürich > Key point is the admin has made a choice and is aw

Re: [OT] was SORBS

corpus.defero wrote: > 2. No mail server rejects based on SORBS. It rejected where admins > choose to implement SORBS at an SMTP level. Same thing. /Per Jessen, Zürich

Re: [OT] was SORBS

Nigel Frankcom wrote: > We're on a BT only exchange here so it's them or nothing, Really? Over ten years ago when I lived in the UK, my first provider was Nildram, I'm sure they didn't run the local exchange. Same here in Switzerland - most of the fibre and copper belongs to Swisscom, then Sun

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 30 Apr 2010, Nigel Frankcom wrote: We're on a BT only exchange here so it's them or nothing, well not quite, I could go CoLo... hmmm maybe not, or satellite, I was involved in setting that up in Cyprus. How about a cheap hosted VPS to handle your outbound mail? If that's all it's doi

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 17:48:49 +0100, "corpus.defero" wrote: >On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 17:19 +0100, Nigel Frankcom wrote: >> On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:59:57 +0100, "corpus.defero" >> wrote: >> >> >On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 16:50 +0100, Nigel Frankcom wrote: >> > >> >> We're on a BT only exchange here so it

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 17:19 +0100, Nigel Frankcom wrote: > On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:59:57 +0100, "corpus.defero" > wrote: > > >On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 16:50 +0100, Nigel Frankcom wrote: > > > >> We're on a BT only exchange here so it's them or nothing, well not > >> quite, I could go CoLo... hmmm may

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:59:57 +0100, "corpus.defero" wrote: >On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 16:50 +0100, Nigel Frankcom wrote: > >> We're on a BT only exchange here so it's them or nothing, well not >> quite, I could go CoLo... hmmm maybe not, or satellite, I was involved >> in setting that up in Cyprus.

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 16:50 +0100, Nigel Frankcom wrote: > We're on a BT only exchange here so it's them or nothing, well not > quite, I could go CoLo... hmmm maybe not, or satellite, I was involved > in setting that up in Cyprus. > Nigel Is there such a thing? I appreciate many are not unbundled

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 14:22:16 +0100, Martin Gregorie wrote: >On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 08:43 -0400, Lee Dilkie wrote: >> First, I'd like to point out that not everyone has the option of >> changing ISP's. Believe it or not, there are many folks who have only >> one choice for high-speed internet acces

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel McDonald wrote: > On 4/30/10 8:22 AM, "Martin Gregorie" wrote: > > > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 08:43 -0400, Lee Dilkie wrote: > >> First, I'd like to point out that not everyone has the option of > >> changing ISP's. Believe it or not, there are many folks wh

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On 4/30/10 8:22 AM, "Martin Gregorie" wrote: > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 08:43 -0400, Lee Dilkie wrote: >> First, I'd like to point out that not everyone has the option of >> changing ISP's. Believe it or not, there are many folks who have only >> one choice for high-speed internet access (myself inc

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 08:43 -0400, Lee Dilkie wrote: > First, I'd like to point out that not everyone has the option of > changing ISP's. Believe it or not, there are many folks who have only > one choice for high-speed internet access (myself included). > However, that doesn't apply to the OP, wh

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 08:43 -0400, Lee Dilkie wrote: > > On 4/30/2010 7:43 AM, corpus.defero wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 11:46 +0100, n.frank...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > Here's the chuckle > > > > > > Mail transport error, MTSPro SMTP Relay Agent could not deliver the > > > followi

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On 4/30/2010 7:43 AM, corpus.defero wrote: > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 11:46 +0100, n.frank...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Here's the chuckle >> >> Mail transport error, MTSPro SMTP Relay Agent could not deliver the >> following message for . >> >> Reason: 550 Dynamic IP Addresses See: >> http://www.

Re: [OT] was SORBS

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 11:46 +0100, n.frank...@gmail.com wrote: > Here's the chuckle > > Mail transport error, MTSPro SMTP Relay Agent could not deliver the > following message for . > > Reason: 550 Dynamic IP Addresses See: > http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?217.36.54.209 > And has it take

[OT] was SORBS

pit.bleh (snakepit.bleh [192.168.2.32]) > by blue-canoe.org.uk (envelope-sender ) with > ESMTPA (MTSPro MTSSmtp 1.61) > for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:25:10 +0100 > From: Nigel Frankcom > To: SpamAssassin > Subject: [OT] Was SORBS > Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:25:09 +0100 > O