Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mail.sendmail > #1290

Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly?

From no.top.post@gmail.com
Newsgroups comp.mail.sendmail, comp.os.linux.networking
Subject Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly?
Date 2012-10-13 04:49 +0000
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <k5artl$d0p$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <TECQXhvKj0FX-pn2-Bcmc4QRCtkdI@SATURN.home>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

In article <TECQXhvKj0FX-pn2-Bcmc4QRCtkdI@SATURN.home>, "Robert Blair" <nobody@nowhere.not> wrote: 

> On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 20:17:08 UTC, David Brown 
> <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> wrote:
> 
> > On 11/10/12 21:28, David Hough wrote:
> > > no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
--snip--
> > 
> > It's a pity that lots of (most?) ISPs do not block SMTP traffic like this.
> > 
> > It is also a shame that people like yourself and the OP who have a mail 
> > transport agent set up like this get caught in the cross-fire.
> 
> But if you know what to do you can easily get around the block.

Will you please tell me how.
> 
> > The simple answer is that you set your mail transport agent to pass on 
> > all outgoing mail to your ISP's mail relay as a "smart host", as exim 
> > calls it.  

Where's the docos on how to do that?
 
> > You lose a small amount of control - you no longer have the 
> > power over retry attempts or delays, for example, and don't get a 
> > delivery failure notice until the ISP's relay gives up on the message. 
> > But other than that you save yourself a lot of effort, save your own 
> > server a bit of effort, and avoid problems such as receivers blocking 
> > your mails just because your neighbour has a virus.
> 
> Check with the company that supplies your email server to see
> what other ports they have open for email other than port 25.
> 
> I expect they have at least port 587 and possibly 465.
> 
No, ports 587 & 465 <fail>

Previously, all my traces in the re-coded per RFC, 'sender' 
showed OK, like TxAuthenticate, but the mail was apparently
just not forwarded.

NOW, it gets <reject messages> .
So they are changing their set up.
Which screws me.
It's like Micro$hit continually moving the requirements, so
that you have to continually be paying them.
Like narcotics peddlars.

Back to comp.mail.sendmail | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-11 17:52 +0000
  Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? David Hough <noone$$@llondel.org> - 2012-10-11 20:28 +0100
    Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-10-11 22:17 +0200
      Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2012-10-11 23:53 +0100
        Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? terryc <newsninespam-spam@woa.com.au> - 2012-10-12 13:12 +1100
          Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-12 09:54 +0000
            Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? terryc <newsninespam-spam@woa.com.au> - 2012-10-13 00:42 +1100
          Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? David Hough <noone$$@llondel.org> - 2012-10-12 15:47 +0100
        Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-10-12 10:59 +0200
        Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-10-15 15:30 +0000
          Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-15 20:40 +0000
          Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2012-10-15 23:32 +0100
            Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-10-16 01:36 +0000
      Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? "Robert Blair" <nobody@nowhere.not> - 2012-10-12 01:13 -0500
        Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-10-12 11:02 +0200
        Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-13 04:49 +0000
          Re: Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? "Robert Blair" <nobody@nowhere.not> - 2012-10-13 01:51 -0500
            Re (3): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-14 08:10 +0000
        Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-13 08:48 +0000
        Re (3): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-14 18:59 +0000
      Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? Joe Zeff <the.guy.with.the.sideburns@lasfs.info> - 2012-10-12 07:22 +0000
      Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? David Hough <noone$$@llondel.org> - 2012-10-12 15:58 +0100
    Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-12 09:54 +0000
  Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2012-10-11 21:21 +0100
    Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-12 09:54 +0000
      Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2012-10-12 22:40 +0100
        Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-14 08:10 +0000
          Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? Bob Hauck <postmaster@avalanche.org> - 2012-10-14 08:38 -0400
            Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-14 18:36 +0000
          Re: Dud: ISP so send mail directly? Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2012-10-14 14:25 +0100
            Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-14 18:37 +0000
              Re: Re (2): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2012-10-14 23:44 +0100
                Re (3+): Dud: ISP so send mail directly? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2012-10-15 11:46 +0000

csiph-web