justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY | reply to buddyfrench
Re: Earthlink blocks port 25 outgoing!
No, its good. Well I think so anyway. |
|
kkb
An individual right
join:2000-06-11
Montrose, CO
| I disagree. There are valid instances where mass-mailing should be permitted. Your very own Line Monitoring emailed reports would be forbidden if you used MindSpring's mail system. Also, there are private email systems external to MS/EL some folks use that require SMTP password authentication - these systems will not accept MS relays due to the password requirement and the user is hosed 'cause direct access to the mail server is blocked.
I could agree to say a 30 to 90 day probation period for MS/EL to weed out abusers at which time a person could petition to have the restriction lifted from their account. |
|
Brian D9
join:2000-02-26
Camp Hill, PA | Just curious, if it blocked on port 25, could'nt I reconfigure my co-located server to listen for SMTP on a different port number? And then connect to that port number from my sytem here at home? |
|
bil2k
join:2000-08-19
Pompano Beach, FL | yep |
|
jrousseau
Fudge E. Bear
join:2000-08-08
Houston, TX | reply to justin
What, are you kidding? I can make money fast, and there are lonely college girls waiting to hear from me! How am I supposed to find out about it now?!
--
I am the Lizard King...I can do anything! |
|
graysonf
Premium,MVM
join:1999-07-16
Fort Lauderdale, FL | reply to Brian D9
Sure, then you could connect on another port from home. But how does your coloacated server, now running on a non-standard port, exchange mail with the rest of the world who is still listening on port 25? |
|
wesm
Wyvern.Org
Premium
join:1999-07-29
Lewisville, TX
clubs:
| reply to justin
This makes me glad I'm not an Earthlink subscriber ... One thing I notice Earthlink cheerfully skipped over, and no one has mentioned here yet, is that some people run their own mail servers. If my ISP did this (which would be a violation by them of their own terms of service), that would mean my own, properly secured, mail relay would no longer function.
Its not an ISPs job to harass everyone due to the actions of the few. Give me the service I pay for and run the abusers off the network. If that means I need to pay a bit more to finance the salaries of the people who do that, then wonderful, I'm all for it.
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are easy to annoy and have the root password. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to kkb
If you were an Earthlink customer, you could still send out the Line Monitoring reports via Earthlink servers. You are right that private SMTP servers would need to be reconfigured, but that's somewhat unusual, most people get to their "private" e-mail accounts via VPN, which the port blocking would not affect.
I do agree that some notice would have been a good idea to protect those few who might be using outgoing SMTP connections respectably. As much as I dislike port blocking in general, I do think the good outweighs the bad in this situation. |
|
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| reply to wesm
Well if they only block smtp outgoing, as they imply, then your own mail server would still work for incoming mail. And if you want to use it for outgoing mail, you just have to reconfig it to point to the earthlink mail server which is a very easy change.
And quite possibly if you want to email 10,000 people, you warn them and them exempt the spam trap for you.
Of course this also means they have to be in the loop on what you do with your connection. And they might decide mailing 10,000 people (for whatever reason) is not something that is allowed on your line. |
|
graysonf
Premium,MVM
join:1999-07-16
Fort Lauderdale, FL
| reply to wesm
Earthlink/Mindspring does not allow any type of servers to be run from residential DSL or dialup accounts. It's in their AUP, so the fact that servers aren't allowed shouldn't be news to any of their impacted customers.
The difference now is that rather than merely prohibiting mail servers (and connections to off domain servers) via AUP, they are insuring the prohibition by technical means.
While this is new to Earthlink, Mindspring has been doing it for quite some time. I suppose the recent merger of the two has allowed some of the Mindspring mindset to migrate to the company that gobbled Mindspring up.
Look for similar announcements soon in other Earthlink owned former Mindspring aquisitions, if they haven't already been made - places like Netcom - if they even still have an identity of their own.
And yes, there are ISPs that do cater to those who wish to run servers. I shopped around to find the service and policies I need to operate the way I want to. There's no reason any of the impacted Earthlink customers can't vote with their feet and wallets. It may cost them more, but in my case it didn't.
I can get garbage DSL service from numerous ISPs with draconian AUPs, or excellent and accomodating service for the same price - to the penny. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA | reply to graysonf
Using a firewall, you could forward the nonstandard port to 25 so the server effectively listens on both ports....
-- Rob |
|
Bubba Joe
@uswest.net
| reply to djrobx
This is excellent.
Anyone can still have email delivered to their external domain, i.e. joe@otherdomain.com
All you do is set up your email program for Earthlink to say Joe@otherdomain.com as the reply address instead of Joe@earthlink.com
This is NO problem for anyone at all. In the grand scheme of life! It does, however, punish those losers who spam people because they can't get a real job. The harassment will start to slowly end as other ISPs will follow. Remember, Earthlink is #2 (a distant #2) after AOL.
Good MOVE! |
|
Anon | reply to justin
I used to use Global Crossing for my dialup provider, but after they made the move to PRServ.net (which is an AT&T/IBM ICO group), they were blocking Port 25.. But moreso they didn't give me access to any MX server (stupid screwup). GC used to use UUNet, same provider as Earthlink uses here.
Ok first off I couldn't send mail through GC's MX's.. Then I could finally. But I couldn't use my domain.. Why would I use Frontiernet.net email? I could change providers at anytime, just because of stupid things like this.
Earthlink WILL route my @Maine.rr.com email... They dont' say 'no relaying'. As long as that's the case, I don't mind, as much anyway..
I run my own MX's for a reason.. It's too bad I won't be able to get at them.
Duely noted that 1-Link.net blocks 25, and they use UUNet too. |
|
RBB
@swbell.ne
| reply to kkb
I agree--AT&T WorldNet's port-25 policy is just as you describe: The port is initially blocked, but after 30 days (enough time for you to have to start paying for the service) you can call tech support and have the block removed. I used it all the time to send/receive mail through Yahoo! Mail (since WorldNet's own SMTP server is behind a firewall, so you can't use it while connected to another ISP). I guess I'll have to look and see if my new SWBell DSL line has a port-25 block... |
|
mdntblu
join:1999-09-30
Corona, CA |  reply to Brian D9
yeah you can have it listen on a different port and also even configure it to listen on multiple ports. |
|
Xearthlinkuser
@205.186.x.x
|  reply to justin
I can't use any of my 3 SMPT servers from my earthlink dial up, we now use MSN.
I would ask Sky Davis if I can peek at HIS personal email address or if the tech on the support line will give me their home phone numbers so I might have better access to them for support issues.... |
|
