lev
Napoleon is always right
Premium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
clubs: 
 ·AT&T Midwest
2 edits | Problems reaching AT&T mail servers from DSL static address
So this morning, I have two clients who are on AT&T static service, running their own Linux based servers for e-mail, who are getting the following messages when trying to send to an ameritech.net or sbcglobal.net address.
-----
edit: Just in case you're wondering, AT&T is handling forward and reverse DNS for these sites at ns1.ameritech.net and ns2.ameritech.net and both sites have SPF records in their DNS.
-----
"553 5.3.0 nlpi047,DNSBL:521 >_is_blocked.__For_information_see_»worldnet.att.net/general-info/bl···ry.html"
One office of them simply forwards messages from people's inboxes at their domain to ameritech.net addresses, so that people can read mail from their iPhones.
The other runs conferences, and does send out a lot of e-mail.
Both are getting the exact same message, and on the AT&T link page, the 553 error message isn't even listed, but it's usually an abuse message of some kind.
Is this once again, some new unannounced enforcement of a policy to which maintaining compliance isn't possible because it's not documented?
Interesting too how trying to post this told me that this link showed up in a news story here from the end of March about AT&T being too aggressive in blocking messages. Looks like the same dunderheads are at it again.
»AT&T Tackles Mail Complaints |
|
lev
Napoleon is always right
Premium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
clubs:
·AT&T Midwest
| Well, something's changed, but nothing's happened.
Now, a test message from an affected site to an sbcglobal.net address says:
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
(reason: 553 5.3.0 nlpi007 - m5DM96Gm004957, DNSBL:521_is_blocked.__For_information_see_»att.net/blocks)
It used to say:
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
(reason: 553 5.3.0 flpi133,DNSBL:521_is_blocked.__For_information_see_»worldnet.att.net/general-info/bl···iry.html)
Both URLs point to a page with exactly the same content. |
|
lev
Napoleon is always right
Premium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
clubs:
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to lev
Okay, an update again.
12 hours after filling out AT&T's form, I got an e-mail stating they would unblock between 36-48 hours after I received their message.
I also did a little searching into anything these people might have done to be blacklisted.
I think I figured it out (they don't provide specifics) but I'm none too happy about it.
The owner of the company did an interview with the local NPR station (WBEZ) which will be aired next week. WBEZ provided him with a 748K jpg to e-mail people giving the dates and times. So he e-mailed it to about 50 people, 12 or so of which have ameritech.net, sbcglobal.net, or aatt.net addresses.
Was it an unsolicited message with an attachment? Yes! But was it spam? Hardly. The guy's going to be on the radio, and the people he e-mailed were friends, family, and clients. This hadn't happened before, it was a one-time happening, and he got what will largely be a three-day block. Meanwhile, they couldn't reply to any of their clients using AT&T e-mail addresses. |
|
nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
| Was it an unsolicited message with an attachment? Yes! But was it spam? Hardly. You might be amazed at what gets reported as spam.
A few examples:
Messages from friends;
Homework assignments from the professor;
A personal note to friends mentioning that the sender has been diagnosed with breast cancer.
Some people are a bit to hasty in pushing the "this is spam" button.
--
AT&T dsl; Westell 327w modem/router; SuSE 10.1; firefox 2.0.0.14 |
|
lev
Napoleon is always right
Premium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
clubs: | I know, I know... still, just because someone clicked it as spam doesn't call for a three-day penalty. They've only been an AT&T business internet customer for 5 or so years. |
|
jejouelaflute
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to lev
I've been having trouble with my internet service/mail with att yahoo. Are they having some sort of trouble on their end? I've got the cheapest dsl but it's been running a decent speed until i got on saturday june 14. My mail doesn't load all the time and i can't really browse pages because it's sooooo slow now. |
|
DyerUser
Premium
join:2004-01-29
Dyer, IN
·AT&T Yahoo
| reply to lev
I'm pretty sure it is not a matter of getting reported for spam. They've changed something.
I have a static business DSL account. It was specifically purchased for hosting a domain. I have used it for years with an SMTP server and a web server running on it.
Just today, I got the following:
a.b.c.75 is one of the static IPs. I've had an SMTP server there for nearly 5 years. Checking RBL entries for that IP at »relays.osirusoft.com/cgi-bin/rbcheck.cgi the only ones I see are either deprecated lists that show positives for everything or Search Engine Parking pages that return positives for everthing.
I also checked »www.de.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml to see if my IP block had mistakenly been put on a dynamic IP list. It's not listed on any SORBS lists either.
I've looked through the mail logs and it doesn't look like I have done any spamming.
All of my other IPs are firewalled to block port 25 outbound (among many others.) I tried unblocking one and sending outbound mail from there, only to get the same message. I have tried e-mails to sbcglobal.net in old PacBell and old Ameritech territory. I have tried e-mails to ameritech.net accounts. All result in similar messages.
All appearances are that AT&T has stopped allowing business class DSL accounts to send e-mail to AT&T domains.
EDIT: I should add, my FROM address is not an AT&T address. It is my own domain (e.g. me@example.com NOT me@sbcglobal.net). The MX records and SPF records for that domain show a.b.c.75 as the SMTP server for that domain. |
|
lev
Napoleon is always right
Premium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
clubs:
·AT&T Midwest
| That's EXACTLY the problem I ran into. An outside domain hosted on AT&T DSL Static IP service getting blocked.
But you can't use a blanket statement that AT&T has stopped allowing business class DSL accounts to send mail to AT&T domains. I run one myself and haven't had that problem, and I got one of my clients unblocked.
I'm using ns1.ameritech.net and ns2.ameritech.net to host DNS and reverse DNS for these domains. How about you? |
|
DyerUser
Premium
join:2004-01-29
Dyer, IN
·AT&T Yahoo
4 edits | said by lev  :But you can't use a blanket statement that AT&T has stopped allowing business class DSL accounts to send mail to AT&T domains. I run one myself and haven't had that problem, and I got one of my clients unblocked. You are correct. I can't make a blanket statement. However, the fact that I've not done any kind of bulk mailing at all, that I am still blocked if I use an IP that has NEVER sent e-mail and the fact that I am not listed in ANY publically available spam DNSBL databases really makes it look like this is some type of configuration on AT&T's end. It's possible they are slowly rolling it out.
It's possible it depends on which SMTP server you hit on their end. Earlier in the thread you mentioned two slightly different URLs in the error response. I've seen both in my testing. I doubt this is the pattern, but the old PacBell territory one gave me the one I posted. The old Ameritech territory ones give me the other version. More likely, it is only some of their SMTP servers that are doing this, so some of us are hitting it and some aren't.
I suspect it is either misconfiguration or new policy, but either way it doesn't appear to be fully implemented. I'm iming you my IP address so you can see if there is a pattern there.
said by lev :I'm using ns1.ameritech.net and ns2.ameritech.net to host DNS and reverse DNS for these domains. How about you? I have both forward and reverse DNS at zoneedit.com.
EDIT: I did fill out the form at the link. Is that what you did to get the 36 hour unblock? Or did you contact another channel? I will report back when it unblocks. |
|
DyerUser
Premium
join:2004-01-29
Dyer, IN
·AT&T Yahoo
| reply to lev
E-mail going through
Well, it took about 24 hours for me, but I can e-mail AT&T adresses again.
After following the URL in the error message, choosing Administrator -> Other, and something along the lines of "AT&T Business DSL hosting a mail server that does not send spam," I received an e-mail that contained, in part:
I tried yesterday evening and this morning and nothing was working. Just now tried and e-mails appear to have gone through.
The quoted e-mail certainly implies that my IP block "exhibit[ed] the characteristics of compromised network objects or [was] compromised by an offender of Acceptable Use Policies ... above generous thresholds set by ATT.NET and BELLSOUTH.NET system administrators." I would be very surprised. I have outbound rules preventing client machines from directly using any SMTP ports. The gateway machine that can is very locked down and does not show any indications of excessive network activity. Mail logs on that machine do not either.
I'd find it less offensive if the form letter included a line like "most AT&T DSL customers, even business lines, do not run SMTP servers, so AT&T has begun closely examining any SMTP activity. We apologize for any inconvenience."
Back down off my soap box. |
|
lev
Napoleon is always right
Premium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
clubs:
·AT&T Midwest
| Again, it's exactly the same form letter I got.
Without supplying specific information, they're not really helping people figure out if they're in compliance or not. Then again, it's a great cover-your-ass game to play when you have people making policy decisions for e-mail by the "if it breaks we'll fix it later" method. |
|
jordanair
join:2000-08-15
Wylie, TX
| reply to lev
Re: Problems reaching AT&T mail servers from DSL static address
Lev there rule for sending emails on the to multiple recipients are 50 max to multiple email ending with the same domain ams 100 with same domain..also even if you have a business DSl line the yahoo email account are not business class email accounts they follow the same rules as the residential account.. a business class will be ones like YOUNAME@YOURCOMPANY.com which can be hosted by ATT or ATT/Yahoo.. or you can bring your own hosted domain. you can also associate your hosted domain with the att.net id or sbcglobal.net account if all you have is a pop3 hosted email account....I personally would not use the free id or email as my business email due to the fact that yahoo does not protect you email if they have any issues either due to your error of the mail servers error that may cause stored emails to be deleted |
|
lev
Napoleon is always right
Premium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
clubs: | First off, if they're selling business class DSL service through AT&T and collecting more for it than residential, then residential restrictions shouldn't apply.
At the very least, there should be the opportunity to whitelist. |
|
DyerUser
Premium
join:2004-01-29
Dyer, IN
·AT&T Yahoo
| reply to jordanair
said by jordanair :Lev there rule for sending emails on the to multiple recipients are 50 max to multiple email ending with the same domain ams 100 with same domain. I haven't sent 100 e-mails from my DSL IPs in the last month. The max number of recipients would be less than 10, and I'd bet over 90% have one recipient.
To address your other points, I am using my own domain for the FROM line. The DNS is not hosted with AT&T, but it is configured so that I have never experienced a problem with any recipient mail server except for years ago when I first started and my static IP was listed in some dynamic IP DNS lists. Even then, like now, Ameritech--which was the incarnation at the time--was able to quickly inform the anti-spam service that my block was not dynamic.
As Lev says, I'm paying for business class DSL. It is marketed as something you can use to run servers off of--or at least it was when I got it. I'm paying about $80/month for 6016/768 when I could easily pay half that for non-Business class service and non-Static IP.
I'm not expecting T1 style QOS here because I'm not paying for it. But I am paying a premium and all appearances are that AT&T, extremely arbitrarily decided to place me on a spammer DNSBL--but it's some sort of double secret DNSBL, and they won't protect others from my evil spammer ways because all the while they were preventing me from sending to AT&T DSL customer domains, they were allowing me to send to T1 AT&T hosted domains like my employer and they were allowing me to send out to many others.
If I had gotten infected, started spewing spam and AT&T had agressively shut me down to the entire outside world, not only would I thank them, but I'd be touting their active agressiveness as a positive to anyone who could listen. Instead, they seem to have flipped a switch that says I'm a spammer, without contacting me--but they've not protected the world from their rogue customer, they've simply protected their domains.
It makes no sense. If I'm a spammer, why not shut me down completely and use their contact info to alert me. If I'm not, then why block me from e-mailing neighbors but let me talk to anyone else, including domains using AT&T DNS hosted on AT&T T1s. |
|
jordanair
join:2000-08-15
Wylie, TX
| reply to lev
as I said before your are getting business class dsl service , but the email is the same as residential it is a free yahoo account if you get is now you mainly get the att.net domain and may still be able to to get the sbcglobal.net id , but there is no differenc in the email service provided because it is a free service if you want business class email that has to purchased separately.. no white list on the free yahoo email serviceit is prone to the spam filters set on the outgoing server |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| I thought it was the equivalent of the paid Yahoo! Mail Plus accounts. Still residential purpose, but with some perks not covered by the free Yahoo! Mail accounts.
OTOH, Yahoo! Mail Plus does not even include some features offered by normal ISP email service; such as a 'smarthost' function.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
jordanair
join:2000-08-15
Wylie, TX
| sadly no .. I personnaly don't think they do a good jod of conveying that or maybe sales does not know that... unless there is something ordered extra during sales process they get the same free yahoo email service and if you look at the TOS it lunps comsumer and business together business class service can be purchased I believe some where around 10 bucks a monthwhich would get you a .com addressand i believe with those accounts you can send to about 600 recipients , don't quote me on that though... ok I just pulled this off of the member center shows disconted price for premimum email service but this is like I said supported by Yahoo directly not ATTIS: Professional
SERVICE RETAIL PRICE YOUR PRICE
Email Marketing: GotMarketing's Campaigner subscription -- get 20% more email than the standard offering (3,000 emails/month total)
per month $ 25 $ 20.00 Buy Now
Email Marketing: GotMarketing's Campaigner subscription -- get 20% more email than the standard offering (6,000 emails/month total)
per month $ 40 $ 32.00 Buy Now
|
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| First of all, I have to get this off of my chest:
PISS ON YAHOO!
They won't let me log out; using Opera 9.50, attempting to log out of one account, and log in with another, just gets me back into the logged out account. Something about their site is definitely broken.
Now to the differences between a free Yahoo! Mail account, and a paid Yahoo! Mail Plus account:
The at&t Yahoo! HSI accounts definitely have the equal features of Yahoo! Mail Plus (paid) accounts, not the Yahoo!Mail (free) accounts.
There may be other differences, but those are the salient differences.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
| OT reply to NormanS
PISS ON YAHOO!
They won't let me log out; using Opera 9.50, attempting to log out of one account, and log in with another, just gets me back into the logged out account. I haven't tried that. However, this could just as easily be a browser bug.
You should be able to forcibly "logout" by simply deleting all yahoo.com cookies. Presumably, either Yahoo is failing to delete the appropriate cookie, or your browser is retaining it in spite of its being deleted.
My personal practice is to create a separate firefox profile for each yahoo mail account. That way, I never need to logout; I just start firefox with the desired profile.
--
AT&T dsl; Westell 327w modem/router; SuSE 10.1; firefox 2.0.0.14 |
|
StillLearn
Premium
join:2002-03-21
Streamwood, IL
·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | reply to NormanS
Re: Problems reaching AT&T mail servers from DSL static address
said by NormanS : SMTP/POP3 access is clearly important to a lot of users.
AddressGuard can be a really nice feature. With AddressGuard you
can give different addresses to different people or groups. You
can also opt to turn off spam filtering, or not, for each
AddressGuard address. The emails come in to your regular mailbox,
but the To field will contain the address the sender used. If the
address you gave your sister starts getting spam, delete that
address and give your sister the new email address that you make
for her to use. You can have a different email address to use for
rebates or mailing lists. You can have over a hundred such
addresses. |
|
