[lug] SMTP delivery: No route to host

[j davis]

>
>>On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:46:42PM -0700, Justin-lists wrote:
>> > It's pretty obvious that this is just what they are doing, blocking
>> > all smtp traffic but the traffic that directed to their own smtp
>> > server...
>>
>>I know that many technical people *hate* this policy, where an ISP
>>blocks all outbound SMTP traffic except to their mailserver.  However,
>>as the owner of a local ISP, let me tell you why this is currently a
>>good idea. (I say currently, because spam is going away someday, right?
>>Right..?)
>>
>>ISPs are coming under heavier and heavier fire regarding spam.  It is
>>at epedemic proportions.  Over 1/2 of my daily email is spam, and I think
>>I read somewhere that spam accounts for almost 20% of email traffic on
>>the internet now.
>>
>>This is one of the things that's being done about it.  Over 99% of my
>>customer base (and I imagine most ISPs) have absolutely no reason to be
>>sending email through somebody else's SMTP server.  For the under 1% of
>>my customers who have a legitimate need, I make provisions to allow them
>>to relay through their work server, or wherever.  (in fact, if someone
>>is clueful enough to make the request, and provide the IP addresses
>>they need to relay through, I almost always just add the access rule.)
>>But for the vast majority of users, they don't even want to know what an
>>SMTP server is.  They just want to send and receive email.  It just makes
>>sense to close down SMTP when over 99% of your customers aren't affected.
>>(especially when you're willing to make concessions for the other < 1%.)
>>We (as users) complain about it, but we also get less spam because of it.
>>Most spam is still sent through dialup networks.  I imagine if all the
>>major dialup networks adopted SMTP port blocking, spam volume would
>>plummet. (./~ ...You might saaaaay I'm a dreamer... ./~)
>>
>>I know it's the "geek" thing to do, to run your own mailserver and make
>>your own damn connections.  But even amongst the geek crowd, very few
>>of us have a legitimate need to do so.  It would be nice if we could, but
>>in this case, the benefits of the many really do outweigh those of the
>>few.
>>
>>If you're tired of spam, you'll realize that this is a good thing.
>>And if you *really* want to send email directly to your email server at
>>work, and your ISP won't let you through, just set up an SMTP server at
>>work to listen on port 80 or 23 or something, and relay out that port. :)
>>
>>-k
>
>
>yes the war on spam is huge....sure block port 25, but all this is in
>vain until stupid users learn about email filters. I have worked and still
>work for a few ISPs. And ...if the world is going to reliy on email they
>damn well better figure out "filters".The world can not expect people
>like you to be there mom....if you continue users will not take 
>responabilty
>for themselevs. Maybe all the dumb yuppies and corprate chumps will then
>learn how to use the web and quit f-en wineing all the damn time.
>....I am glad there are Police in the world....but I still lock my door!
>
>(all this hits home with me due to my ISP thinking that blocking
>incoming and outgoing ICMP will f-en save the world or something...)
>
>Hey...maybe you could write a scrip to read there mail and remove
>any offensive langue too....kind of like the way my mom used to meet all my
>friends before I go "hang-out" with them.
>
>Non-Helpless User Slime,
>jd
>


also, your email setup is kinda like being a US Citizen in a
American airport....Just because a few f-ed up....we are
now treated like criminals by our very own country...
i.e. you are punishing your users for shit they didnt do,
maybe a better idea would be better incoming filters...
outgoing filters...how rude...are these not the people
paying your bills?

Big Brother sux,
jd

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail