how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
625 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 rchandraStargate Universe fanPremium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105 | reply to fhmiller5
Re: Verizon's is actually the more-sensible approach said by fhmiller:
The mail server we use at work requires the ip address be one of it's [sic] own for sending. Therefore we can't send through it from home. If we used Verizon for home dsl we couldn't send work mail.
That simply means you haven't set up a mail server that can do this. Go to the Verizon thread and read about the various schemes, the most popular being authenticate-then-email (POP then [E]SMTP). Also, it sounds like you haven't thought about setting up VPN connections (which would put your home computer or network in the IP address space of your company).
If you're not willing to do either of these, it's not VZ's fault, it's the fault of your company.
--
Those willing to sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither. | |
 dimdem
join:2000-06-17
Norfolk, VA | reply to richb01803
I just missed being affected by this policy, since I just moved into an area not served by Verizon DSL and switched to @HOME. But I would have been hurt by it, since I did have my email set up with a different FROM address. My university has a screwy email system based on Lotus Notes. When I am working from home, I access my mail using a web-based client; it isn't too different from using Hotmail or Yahoo. But there is no way to configure the mail client to pop up if I am reading someone else's web page and click on their mailto link. I have to copy their address onto the clipboard, open the webpage for my email, and paste in the address. To avoid that hassle, I used Netscape mail to send mail in that sort of case. But if I am writing to a professor at another university about some professional (professorial?) business, I want to make it clear that I am a professor myself. Professors, and philosophy professors especially, get a lot of mail from cranks, so it is kind of important to have mail coming from an .edu domain. So that is how I set Netscape mail up; it is convenient for me to use, and it gives my mail some initial credibility (until they actually read the content, and realize that I am a crank too, albeit one with a job). Surely there is nothing illegitimate about this? And surely it is a little unreasonable to suggest that I ought to set up a Linux box? Were I still with Verizon, I think that I would be very unhappy about their policy, unless it was shown to make a real difference in the war on spam. | |
rchandraStargate Universe fanPremium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
| reply to sadowski
I think you pretty much have this right, with an exception or two. I think traffic that has no business on the Internet (e.g., with an RFC1918 source IP address) should be filtered out. In this sense, ISPs have to cooperate to become the Internet police.
As far as VZ providing services...they do provide mail, and they hope that their pending change will win them more customers than they will lose. They appear to be playing the open market here. If you and I (both Buffalo VZ subscribers) don't like their new SMTP policy, we can subscribe to Telerama for example instead. I don't know of any out there, but there could be other hosting companies that would be willing to accept your mail, and if VZ start mangling tcp/25, also provide a VPN service so you can get at their [E]SMTP servers.
I don't get the analogy to commercial TV. There is plenty on commercial TV that could be deemed offensive. The alternative would be PBS I'm guessing? If anything, I'd think that'd be more sanitized/cleaned than commercial TV. Also, if by "commercial TV" you would be willing to include satellite/cable programs, I can think of a certain popular Comedy Central program that a lot of people think is quite objectionable (but I personally usually find hilarious).
(edit was to add anchor/link to RFC1918)
[text was edited by author 2001-07-03 11:20:58] | |
| reply to dimdem
OK, so you're using Netscape Messenger. How difficult is it to click Edit -> Preferences -> Mail & Newsgroups -> Identity and then fill in the following two fields:
Email address: drdaleemiller@verizon.net
Reply-To address: drdaleemiller@myuniversity.edu
I don't quite understand that this would lack any "professionalism". It does have the annoying side-effect of making it more obvious that your ISP is Verizon, something a lot of us would prefer to hide (and you voted against with your wallet  , but that fact can be seen in the Received headers of your outbound mail anyway. | |
 sadowskiI Am My Own DoppelgangerPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-14
Buffalo, NY | reply to rchandra
said by rchandra:
I think traffic that has no business on the Internet (e.g., with an RFC1918 source IP address) should be filtered out.
Private addresses, I think? I have no problem with that. I have no problem with any filtering done on technical grounds, if it pertains to the actual technical limits of the network (vs. too many users using porn sites so we block them because it wastes our bandwidth - a psuedo-technical argument).
quote:
As far as VZ providing services...they do provide mail,
There is also language on their website that suggests that they are not contractualy obligated to do so. I posted it in the Verizon forum a while back. (I'm not, however, suggestting that they are planning to pull mail service or charge extra for.) quote:
If you and I (both Buffalo VZ subscribers) don't like their new SMTP policy, we can subscribe to Telerama for example instead.
But that's just more of that go back where you came from kind of thing. It doesn't address the approriateness of this kind of action. quote:
I don't get the analogy to commercial TV. There is plenty on commercial TV that could be deemed offensive. The alternative would be PBS I'm guessing?
PBS has become very safe and very commercial oriented (in the sense that it has started pandering toward mass audience to facilitate donations). If you're old enough to remeber PBS in the seventies they were doing and showing original drama of substance, controversial political/social programs and science programming that had substance (not like what poor Nova has become now, or since they stopped buying Horizons and replacing the narration track with an American voice). So, no, I don't see PBS as much of an alternative anymore.  quote:
If anything, I'd think that'd be more sanitized/cleaned than commercial TV. Also, if by "commercial TV" you would be willing to include satellite/cable programs, I can think of a certain popular Comedy Central program that a lot of people think is quite objectionable (but I personally usually find hilarious).
OK, my laziness. The commercial broadcast networks in which all is sanitized and made pallitable to some oddball marketers sensibility (or their distorted view of 'our' sensibilities) and where everything is faked and controlled for and by marketting. I think show title "Everyone Loves Raymond" represents a lot TV marketing's mentality.
Other than South Park and some of the old Sunday animation block (the transplated Duckman, Bob & Margaret, Dr. Katz) I don't know CC that well, but it is owned by MTV (isn't it?) which would make it an interesting study since MTV and the MTV Networks are pure marketing. | |
sadowskiI Am My Own DoppelgangerPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-14
Buffalo, NY | reply to richb01803
said by richb01803:
I don't quite understand that this would lack any "professionalism".
Because Me@MySmallBusiness.com would not show in the Sender field of my client's mail reader. What's more, not every mail client will default to using the Reply-To address. Some will prompt and say use reply-to instead of...? There's more than I can think of too but there's no need to get into it here. My example should be enough. | |
rchandraStargate Universe fanPremium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105 | reply to sadowski
said by sadowski:
(I'm not, however, suggestting that they are planning to pull mail service or charge extra for.)
As long as they leave my outbound TCP port 25 alone, that suits me (and I'm guessing you) just fine.
said by sadowski:
quote:
If you and I (both Buffalo VZ subscribers) don't like their new SMTP policy, we can subscribe to Telerama for example instead.
But that's just more of that go back where you came from kind of thing. It doesn't address the approriateness of this kind of action.
Maybe not directly, but indirectly it does. If/when it works, the market can be a very powerful force indeed.
said by sadowski:
PBS has become very safe and very commercial oriented (in the sense that it has started pandering toward mass audience to facilitate donations). If you're old enough to remeber PBS in the seventies they were doing and showing original drama of substance, controversial political/social programs and science programming that had substance (not like what poor Nova has become now, or since they stopped buying Horizons and replacing the narration track with an American voice).
Nope, I wasn't too much of a PBS watcher back then. In the late sixties and early seventies, I was a "Sesame Street" and "Electric Company" viewer (born 7-Sep-1965).
said by sadowski:
quote:
I can think of a certain popular Comedy Central program that a lot of people think is quite objectionable (but I personally usually find hilarious).
I think show title "Everyone Loves Raymond" represents a lot TV marketing's mentality.
definitely.
said by sadowski:
Other than South Park...
That's the one! Come to think of it, "The Man Show" would probably be pretty disgusting to many, but I don't watch that much...only the part that's on after something else I watch (used to be on after "South Park").
BTW...I have to chuckle just about every time I pass by Southpark Ave., because almost every time, that theme starts running through my head.
--
Benjamin Franklin: Those who sacrifice freedom for a sense of security deserve neither. | |
sadowskiI Am My Own DoppelgangerPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-14
Buffalo, NY | said by rchandra:
As long as they leave my outbound TCP port 25 alone, that suits me (and I'm guessing you) just fine.
Yeah, you and I will be fine but I am disturbed by what could be a trend. I don't know if you are familiar with the old ServTech out of Rochester (now owned by Verio) but they did their best to provide a good networking experience to even dialup users because they were a network supplier (till places like Kodak and others decided they could handle it on their own). Larger ISPs like AOL, MSN, Earthlink, Verizon, etc. have the power to really change the network experience by restricting services which most people will just live with because they don't know better or feel they can't do anything about. The ISPs can, or do have the power to make the expereince as bland as tv, as safe as tv or as simplified as USA Today. To me, the danger is in a gradual deterioration of the experience by picking away at small bits. (Shrug) That's what it's all about to me. quote:
Maybe not directly, but indirectly it does. If/when it works, the market can be a very powerful force indeed.
My problem with that is that the masses don't always know. The Internet now, and eventualy networking generaly, is being marketed to the masses and they are not knowledgable enough or experienced enough to truly judge. Everybody's first car was great because they just didn't know better. quote:
(born 7-Sep-1965).
You're just a kid! (5-12-56)
quote:
That's the one! Come to think of it, "The Man Show" would probably be pretty disgusting to many, but I don't watch that much...only the part that's on after something else I watch (used to be on after "South Park").
I prefer a good porn film.
quote:
BTW...I have to chuckle just about every time I pass by Southpark Ave., because almost every time, that theme starts running through my head.
For a number reasons, I cancelled my cable tv service and I shall miss SP (though I hear the full episodes are available on the network ) | |
 kjv
join:2001-05-07
Buffalo, NY | reply to sporkme
Re: Verizon's is actually the more-sensible approa That's true, BUT your IP address/reverse DNS will show up in the header.
So, guess what.... YUP!!! You're spamming, and it can be proven, and therefore you can be disconnected from the VZ service.
Sorry... Nice try though.... Send much spam do ya? | |
dimdem
join:2000-06-17
Norfolk, VA | reply to richb01803
Re: Verizon's is actually the more-sensible approach said by richb01803:
OK, so you're using Netscape Messenger. How difficult is it to click Edit -> Preferences -> Mail & Newsgroups -> Identity and then fill in the following two fields:
Email address: drdaleemiller@verizon.net
Reply-To address: drdaleemiller@myuniversity.edu
I don't quite understand that this would lack any "professionalism". It does have the annoying side-effect of making it more obvious that your ISP is Verizon, something a lot of us would prefer to hide (and you voted against with your wallet , but that fact can be seen in the Received headers of your outbound mail anyway.
It isn't hard at all. But aren't I right to think that this would make it clear that my email did not come from my university account, even though their reply would go there? They would see verizon.net first, right? That is, for me, a (small, I don't want to overblow this) problem. I know that I am going to look differently at email that comes from an .edu address than from a .net address, and I expect that most other people in my position would do the same. I'll assume that someone writing from an .edu domain is someone with a certain level of competence, since they were able to get a job in a very tight market, and someone with something potentially interesting/important to say; I'll be more skeptical about some message that looks to be on an academic subject but comes from somewhere else. I will read .edu mail more quickly and in a different frame of mind than a message from yahoo.com or verizon.net. Now look, obviously this is a subtle difference. It is not like I only read .edu mail, or base my judgment of a message's content solely on the domain whence it originated (it is also not like I commonly say 'whence'). And maybe my professional messages would all be received the same way even if they came from verizon.net. But if I am asking someone for a favor, or trying to convince them of something, I'd like to have them in the best frame of mind from the start.
But look, I hate spam as much as anyone. If what Verizon is doing is really a very effective way of fighting spam, then I would (if I were still a Verizon customer) be willing to put up with it.
Dale | |
sadowskiI Am My Own DoppelgangerPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-14
Buffalo, NY | said by drdaleemiller:
But aren't I right to think that this would make it clear that my email did not come from my university account, even though their reply would go there? They would see verizon.net first, right?
Yes, but more than that, if you were subscribed to any lists from @wherever.edu you could not participate in that list from your Verizon account anymore since most lists validate by by the From: field. That could be a very real problem for people who have their own domains without a corresponding email account somewhere since unless they unsub now, after the 12th, they won't be able to send comments or commands to the list using Verizon servers. | |
 RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | reply to tschmidt
Re: Verizon's is actually the more-sensible approa said by tschmidt:
Paragraph 2. Lets say I have a large number of email accounts. The simplest configuration from a user's perspective is the use the SMTP server on the network I am physically connected to. It is possible to use the SMTP server provided by others.
WRONG. The simplest configuration is one where your SMTP Settings are independent of your current connectivity (ie: You always ASK for SMTP Server X for Persona X and SMTP Server Y for Persona Y and any Port25 Blocking will AUTOMATICALLY force direct you to the Connectivity Provider's SMTP Server which accepts ALL Email for relaying) . This is simple since it works no matter where you are coming in from AND no changes are needed in your Email Parms just because you are connecting from a different Connectivity Provider). You either use the SMTP Server you ask for (which may verify your authority via SMTP AUTH/POP-Before-SMTP/POP XTND SMTP) or have the SMTP Server Address ignored and are directed to a provided SMTP Server which will handle your Email NO MATTER what From or Reply-To address is provided. | |
 dru
join:2000-09-14
Corona, CA | reply to richb01803
Re: Verizon's is actually the more-sensible approach While the email may get to the right place with this scheme, there are many situations where this approach is simply unacceptable.
Some may be in a business where they do not care, but for many people it's important. When I work out of my home at night or weekends, I use Adelphia cable access because I can't get DSL where I live, but I work for an independent DSL ISP. I really do NOT want official corporate communications to have a "from myusername@adelphia.net" or any other ISP appearing in the recipients "from" column and for what should be obvious reasons.
Adelphia rotates the dynamic/DHCP leases now among 5 Class C subnets, so I can not incorporate my IP address in the relay config of the corporate server without opening the server to too many other people.
I know it's unfair, but I tend to think less of a bandwidth salesman from XO extolling his companies virtues, yet the email originates from an @aol.com or @earthlink.net address. What, you don't even use your company's product? And sometimes it becomes a bit confusing. I've had a partner or department manager claiming "hey, I received this solicitation from verizon" but when I take the time to read the entire signature line, I realize the sender represents a different company.
Of course, it's Verizon's right to do what they please as a business decision. But I agree with Justin, if they are attempting to combat spam this is a lame, and unnecessary move. Blocking port 25 remains the only effective measure, and it's probably only really necessary on dynamic accounts; mail logs along with radius logs can pinpoint errant spammers who relay off the ISP servers.
Of course, port-25 blocks thwart the die-hards who want to operate their own SMTP server. But soon, running your own without explicit hosting arrangements with the ISP may be difficult. Many ISP mail servers are now refusing connections to SMTP servers that do not match forward and reverse DNS, or don't identify themselves what is resolved as the reverse. This is EXTREMELY effective in tripping up spam proliferation programs using outsources dialup connections and such. I believe ELNK has adopted this. So if your server identifies it self as mail.yourdomain.com but your IP reverses as dslcust-NYC3-12345.verizon.net then they won't accept it.
Bottom line, the "I deliver it directly to the recipients mail server" will soon not be a viable option either. | |
|
