Lizz
Premium
join:2002-10-22
Fullerton, CA | reply to homenode
Re: Email Problems?
Brett,
Did you see what Dan Goodwin wrote for The Register??
No telling what effects a little press might have  |
|
jmorlan
Hmm... That's funny.
Premium
join:2001-02-05
Pacifica, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by Lizz  :Did you see what Dan Goodwin wrote for The Register?? No telling what effects a little press might have Spelled "Goodin," I think:
»www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/24···filters/
Links to several threads here.
--
If America has an official philosophy, it surely includes the belief in individualism, competition, private property, democracy, freedom, and a deep faith in education. This social philosophy is called "liberalism." GKM (1936) |
|
Lizz
Premium
join:2002-10-22
Fullerton, CA | Ooops, sorry Dan.
And thanks, jmorlan, for correcting my mistake and putting in the link. I tried to get back to add the link, and for some reason, this site would NOT load, got an error message several times. Then got distracted and forgot. |
|
jhloaded
join:2008-03-25
Pleasanton, CA
·SONIC.NET
| Good morning everyone,
Thought I would share my experience with the lovely AT&T as it relates to this problem.
For the past week and a half my users in my office were getting a lot of bouncebacks when trying to send to clients on sbcglobal.net & att.net email addresses. The bounceback typically contained this:
nlpi099.prodigy.net #553 5.3.0 nlpi099,DNSBL:521(our ip) >_is_blocked.__See_»www.att.net/bls_rbl/_for_information. ##
After going out to the site mentioned in the message, I submitted a couple requests via their webform. I then received responses back a few days later stating that my servers were removed from their block list. I then went and immediately had my users try to email clients and found that they were immediately rejected with the same bounceback. I went to submit another request via their webform and then see that the form is unavailable with problems every time I try to submit a request.
Frustrated with this, I started at the AT&T corporate - »www.corp.att.com/contact/corporate.html - by calling their corporate information line @ 908-221-4191. I navigate through the short menu system and finally end up hitting 0 to get an operator. I then get an recorded message stating that they are having technical difficulties with this line. After a few days pass, I try again and finally get someone on the phone. I then proceed to play the "transfer" game getting pawned off to 4 different departments until finally I get a hold of someone in the East Bay office from the Internet Services division. This person was extremely helpful and worked with me over the next couple of days testing email communication and working with the IISS department to make sure that I was removed.
After working with this person, I was finally able to get email messages through to both att.net and sbcglobal.net addresses. My wife's company is experiencing the same problem and she works in the staffing industry where hundreds of people are seekings jobs and could have AT&T email addresses. AT&T is seriously impacting a lot of businesses with this poorly implemented project of theirs. |
|
homenode
Premium
join:2007-11-18
Bullhead City, AZ
| This is the most positive response from at&t that I've heard of yet. Unfortunately for the majority of folks outside the at&t hegemony, this may not be possible.
I have concluded my research, and I've posted a summary to another thread on these forums. Alas, it is the end of a long, hard road.
»Re: Has AT&T and/or Yahoo started filtering Spam? |
|
SilentLamb
@smu.edu
| reply to Lizz
Yahoo has suddenly decided to start rejecting email...well...because they're Yahoo and they freaking well can. We're not an open rely and we're not anyone's RBL. We're an educational insitution. We do NOT spam anyone. Yet, for some bizarre reason, this what we get when we try to send to anyone with a Yahoo addy. This was a test email from *me* to *me* at my *own* Yahoo account.
Mar 27 14:50:29 mailhost postfix/qmgr[27984]: 497B11A21FE: to=, relay=none, delay=5.3, delays=5.2/0.03/0/0, dsn=4.0.0, status=deferred (delivery temporarily suspended: host g.mx.mail.yahoo.com[206.190.53.191] refused to talk to me: 553 Mail from XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX not allowed - [10]) |
|
C DM
join:2002-12-31
| said by SilentLamb :
Yahoo has suddenly decided to start rejecting email...well...because they're Yahoo and they freaking well can. We're not an open rely and we're not anyone's RBL. We're an educational insitution. We do NOT spam anyone. Yet, for some bizarre reason, this what we get when we try to send to anyone with a Yahoo addy. This was a test email from *me* to *me* at my *own* Yahoo account.
Mar 27 14:50:29 mailhost postfix/qmgr[27984]: 497B11A21FE: to=, relay=none, delay=5.3, delays=5.2/0.03/0/0, dsn=4.0.0, status=deferred (delivery temporarily suspended: host g.mx.mail.yahoo.com[206.190.53.191] refused to talk to me: 553 Mail from XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX not allowed - [10])
»ymailupdates.com/blog/2008/03/11···equests/ |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to SilentLamb
said by SilentLamb :
Yahoo has suddenly decided to start rejecting email...well...because they're Yahoo and they freaking well can. We're not an open rely and we're not anyone's RBL. We're an educational insitution. We do NOT spam anyone. Yet, for some bizarre reason, this what we get when we try to send to anyone with a Yahoo addy. This was a test email from *me* to *me* at my *own* Yahoo account.
Mar 27 14:50:29 mailhost postfix/qmgr[27984]: 497B11A21FE: to=, relay=none, delay=5.3, delays=5.2/0.03/0/0, dsn=4.0.0, status=deferred (delivery temporarily suspended: host g.mx.mail.yahoo.com[206.190.53.191] refused to talk to me: 553 Mail from XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX not allowed - [10])
Man. Stay away for 10 to 12 days, and things just fall apart. In any case, you do know, don't you, that 'g.mx.mail.yahoo.com' does not handle email for any AT&T domain? That is only for email to <%User_ID%@yahoo.com> accounts. The following are the AT&T domains, none of which are handled by Yahoo! MX servers:
ameritech.net
att.net
bellsouth.net
flash.net
nvbell.net
pacbell.net
prodigy.net
sbcglobal.net
snet.net
swbell.net
wans.net
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
 ·DIRECTV
 ·magicjack.com
·AT&T Midwest
| hey guys and gals:
With the e-mail errors and time outs you are getting can you post these in the direct forum?
Just need the following
• The ID's affected
• the errors that each id is getting, if say ID-a is getting a different error than id-b, that would be a difference.
• Does webmail work?: Note: a simple verify and yes or no will work here.
• E-mail client you are using
• DSL number if you have one or account number, for Uverse the BAN (Billing Account Number) will be it.
Then in a direct post please select [e-mail prob] and post away.
Thanks
David
--
If you have a topic in the direct forum please reply to it or a post of mine, I get a notification when you do this.
Koetting Ford, Granite City, illinois... YOU'RE FIRED!!
|
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
1 edit | Dupe post, please nuke |
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
·DIRECTV
·magicjack.com
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to David
Got some info on some possible causes of mail problems
I have a few people that are getting an error 553. here's a document I got earlier today that should help with those. |
|
Dugbert
join:2007-02-07
Newport Beach, CA
| said by David :I have a few people that are getting an error 553. here's a document I got earlier today that should help with those. Thank you immensely for this. This is the first thing I've read for days that actually helped to solve my problem. I was unable to send with non-ATT/Yahoo "from" headers even after "verifying" the additional addresses. This revealed to me the additional step of "adding" those addresses as additional "accounts."
I raise my glass to you, David. Cheers!
(Apologies to anyone who posted the same info as it failed to soak into my thick head as well as this PDF did.) |
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
·DIRECTV
·magicjack.com
·AT&T Midwest
| said by Dugbert :Thank you immensely for this. This is the first thing I've read for days that actually helped to solve my problem. I was unable to send with non-ATT/Yahoo "from" headers even after "verifying" the additional addresses. This revealed to me the additional step of "adding" those addresses as additional "accounts." Thanks for the confirm that it helped, yea I think they are still allowing the from field to be different, but if you want it different you have to verify the account exists. Something I think spammers were getting away with.
said by Dugbert :I raise my glass to you, David. Cheers! Actually if you can pass me one that would suit me fine! 
Oh wait... no drinking on the job!! 
--
If you have a topic in the direct forum please reply to it or a post of mine, I get a notification when you do this.
Koetting Ford, Granite City, illinois... YOU'RE FIRED!!
|
|
rdwyer
@sbcglobal.net | reply to Lizz
Re: Email Problems?
I talked to Management at AT&T DSL. He said that the filter will remain, and that they won't change anything. I haven't received any emails for weeks. AT&T sux! |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to David
Re: Got some info on some possible causes of mail problems
said by David :I think they are still allowing the from field to be different, but if you want it different you have to verify the account exists. Something I think spammers were getting away with. I have not seen much, if any, spam through Yahoo! Mail servers. This does not stop spammers from forging sender email addresses using other mail hosts. jordanair offers a more plausible suggestion here:
»ATT Email powered by Yahoo
Closing a loophole which allowed businesses to use Yahoo! Mail servers (including 'smtp.mail.yahoo.com') on the cheap ($19.99 a year) instead of paying for hosting their own domains.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to rdwyer
Re: Email Problems?
This "filter" is a requirement of Yahoo!, not AT&T Internet Services. It applies to all Yahoo! Mail servers, including 'smtp.mail.yahoo.com'.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
·DIRECTV
·magicjack.com
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to NormanS
Re: Got some info on some possible causes of mail problems
now that makes sense. What kills me is some people,even though they have their own SMTP server for their own webhost, thought it was required to use our SMTP.
One thing to note: if you have your own Webhosting/email SMTP server connection, it is not required that you use at&t Yahoo! 's SMTP server at all. |
|
tonydi
Premium,MVM
join:2001-05-11
San Jose, CA
| said by David :One thing to note: if you have your own Webhosting/email SMTP server connection, it is not required that you use at&t Yahoo! 's SMTP server at all. However, it should be noted that to do this you'll either have to change the SMTP port number to 587 (if your hosting company supports 587, most do) or else you'll need to request that port 25 be unblocked. To get it unblocked go here, fill out the details of your Master Account and select "**Opt Out Port 25" from the Abuse Type pull down....
»helpme.att.net/servabuse.php
AT&T will unblock 25 within hours of receiving the request. |
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
·DIRECTV
·magicjack.com
·AT&T Midwest
2 edits | Thanks tony, I forgot to mention that one, one thing to note also is on tony's info is 3 things
• once the unblock is requested it can take up to 24 hours but I have heard of them being done in 15 min. So keep that in mind.
• Another thing you will also have to re-authenticate with the ID that you request unblocked. Note: if you use say your master account with e-mail but use say a sub-account for say your person router authentication, the router's account would need to be unblocked and equipment re authenticated in order to complete the unblock. Any unblock of port 25 you request is 1/2 done by at&t and in order for it to be completed you have to re-authenticate in order for it to take hold.
• Also note: Once unblocked, do keep in mind if you are caught spamming, or show up on blacklists you can be locked back down. That's just security measure and best e-mail practice. |
|
tonydi
Premium,MVM
join:2001-05-11
San Jose, CA
| Good info on the re-authentication, I wasn't aware of that requirement. What a PAIN this whole authentication idea is! Perhaps once MS takes over Yahoo, AT&T will find email service from someone who looks at changes from the customer's perspective.  |
|
