Dud: ISP so send mail directly?

Discussion in 'Linux Networking' started by no.top.post, Oct 11, 2012.

  1. no.top.post

    no.top.post Guest

    I'm subscribed to mail-lists from 10 years ago.

    Now my wireless connection via my new ISP can't
    access smtp of the original ISP. So the mail-lists
    can still mail me via pop, but I can't reply.

    Is it realistic for me to try to email the mail-lists directly,
    from my installed `sendmail`?

    == TIA
     
    no.top.post, Oct 11, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. no.top.post

    David Brown Guest

    Any self-respecting ISP will block all outgoing SMTP traffic that is not
    going directly to its own email relays, unless you have a special
    arrangement with them or have an account (such as a "professional"
    account) that allows such access. The simple facts of life are that the
    huge majority of computers that want to send mail directly to
    recipients' mail servers are Windows machines infected by viruses or
    spambots. And blocking SMTP traffic from individual machines (except
    when directed through the ISP's mail relay, which presumably has
    anti-spam and anti-virus checks) is the single most efficient and simple
    way to stop such spam being spread.

    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.


    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. 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.
     
    David Brown, Oct 11, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. no.top.post

    Chris Davies Guest

    Why do you think there's a correlation between not being able to use your
    old ISP's SMTP server and not being able to email to the mailing lists?

    Your mailing lists are presumably using an ISP-specific email address -
    from your old ISP. However, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to use
    your new ISP's SMTP server to deliver email using your old (but valid)
    email address.

    Chris
     
    Chris Davies, Oct 11, 2012
    #3
  4. no.top.post

    Chris Davies Guest

    That's very much the exception here in the UK. (Unfortunately.)
    Chris
     
    Chris Davies, Oct 11, 2012
    #4
  5. no.top.post

    terryc Guest

    Interesting. Regional effect? After running the incoming address through
    zen.spamhaus which blocks 99% and thus saves me download fees, the
    majority. for me, of "spam" now comes through Asian language IPs (cn &
    jp). I do have B, C & D(IP) blocks on Korean as well.

    I actually get exceedingly litte spam from dynamic(sorbs?) IPs according
    to spamcop, so I've never bothered invoking a sendmail test(jargon?) on
    dynamic IPs.

    My view is that "open proxy" (spamcop test*) gets a REJECT in access and
    no reporting address gets a "550 we dont want your spam" message" in access.

    *Over a decade ago, when I started running a mail server(smtp) it would
    accept everything and then process it by various scripts. At the time,
    Sorbs decreed that my server was OPEN PROXY, which it wasn't. so I've
    been wary about this label ever since.

    The good part was that I was sharing spam via CD for people who wanted
    to train their spam filters. Eventually I upgraded to sendmail and saved
    a enormous amount of incoming($$$) traffic.

    Getting back to the point about ISPs. Apart from briefly having my
    current ISP provide DNS, I have never had any ISP require me to use
    their mail server or blocked releveant ports. Caveat, I will not use one
    that does.

    Sadly, it is an issue of technical skills within the ISP. Dealng with
    DNS issues was bad enough, but I'm not lining up to learn the
    configuration of whatever mail server they think is flavour of the month
    and continually fixing their configuration.

    Caveat, you probably can afford a better class is ISP if you are
    employed in a large company rather than running your own show.
     
    terryc, Oct 12, 2012
    #5
  6. no.top.post

    Robert Blair Guest

    Not entirely true. My ISP blocks port 25 to anything other than their email
    server. My hosting company has the email server I use on other ports such as
    2525 so I can use SMTP to them without getting blocked.

    Very true from my experince.

    But if you know what to do you can easily get around the block.

    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.
     
    Robert Blair, Oct 12, 2012
    #6
  7. no.top.post

    Joe Zeff Guest

    What they actually block is Port 25. They still allow outgoing Port 587,
    because that uses SMTPAUTH. I know, because I have my home machines use
    Port 587 to send my mail via the servers at my domain's hosting company
    instead of my ISP's servers.
     
    Joe Zeff, Oct 12, 2012
    #7
  8. no.top.post

    David Brown Guest

    It is probably the exception most places - most ISPs are not
    particularly concerned about being "good net citizens".

    In the UK, there has been such a race to get the lowest price on net
    access that the quality for most ISPs is abysmal. It is full of
    companies offering ADSL "up to 8 Mb/s" - with the reality being perhaps
    200 Kb/s during peak times, along with a traffic cap that means you
    can't download a Linux Ubuntu DVD without hitting your limits.
     
    David Brown, Oct 12, 2012
    #8
  9. no.top.post

    David Brown Guest

    Mail servers often also use port 587 for TLS SMTP and 465 for SSL SMTP,
    and ISPs normally don't block these. But there is no need to block them
    - viruses and spambots stick to port 25 and don't use authentication -
    if they can't send somewhere quickly and easily, they just move on to a
    different target. So a port like this is ideal for accessing externally
    hosted mailservers.
    Indeed - but the aim is to stop spambots that /don't/ try to go around
    such blocks.
     
    David Brown, Oct 12, 2012
    #9
  10. no.top.post

    no.top.post Guest

    I didn't want to mention that that one too is OOO, and will be fixed
    real-soon-now, for the LAST MONTH. Everything is going to shit,
    since control was handed to the natives here.

    I'm <in the jungle, in a war situation>, so when I go on-line, I just
    want to be able to <shoot a reply> to my mail-lists who KNOW
    me, and are not expected to block me.
     
    no.top.post, Oct 12, 2012
    #10
  11. no.top.post

    no.top.post Guest

    ! Yes, currently I'm getting a wave from *.jp
    Last time/S there were some international games on, a spam-wave
    also came from the far east. Strange?
    No. If you follow 'bling' you get to M$. And then you're really
    screwed re. INDEPENDANCE.
     
    no.top.post, Oct 12, 2012
    #11
  12. no.top.post

    terryc Guest

    My understanding isthe Korea is the worlds biggest games market, so
    there is a bit of by wash around from spamming related tothat.
     
    terryc, Oct 12, 2012
    #12
  13. no.top.post

    Chris Davies Guest

    You have a gmail account, which accepts authenticated SMTP.
    Chris
     
    Chris Davies, Oct 12, 2012
    #13
  14. no.top.post

    no.top.post Guest

    Will you please tell me how.
    Where's the docos on how to do that?
    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.
     
    no.top.post, Oct 13, 2012
    #14
  15. no.top.post

    Robert Blair Guest

    Use a port other than 25 when you connect to your email server.

    Look at the sendmail documentation on how to configure sendmail to use a
    "smart host".

    I would have expected at least one to work, are you sure you configured the
    email client correctly?

    Call the company that is supplying your email server and ask the what ports
    are available. One email server I use requires you use SSL and use port 995
    to get email and port 465 to send email. Another email server requires that I
    POP before send to port 587.
     
    Robert Blair, Oct 13, 2012
    #15
  16. no.top.post

    no.top.post Guest

    Will you please tell me how.
    Where's the docos on how to do that?
    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.
     
    no.top.post, Oct 13, 2012
    #16
  17. no.top.post

    no.top.post Guest

    --> OK: goog: sendmail+%22smart+host%22
    If your living amongst sheep, you might suceed with animal psychology
    provided you were skilled at it, else it's best to try technology.
    OK, I remember once that, <after a pop-fetch 'it knew' me, for smtp>.
    As you add more variables:
    ISPs, ports, UserIDs .. the choas becomes unmanageable.
    So re-applying to the mail-lists just adds more confusion.
     
    no.top.post, Oct 14, 2012
    #17
  18. no.top.post

    no.top.post Guest

    Is there any 'gmail account' withOUT TxAuth?

    AFAIK the mail-lists initiated in the 90's
    know me as <my ISP1's ID>.

    Re-applying to each mail-list as my gmail-ID, is opening
    a whole NEW canOworms. Just consider the traffic of THIS
    thread to try to get a simple answer.

    Besides I HATE using the web-2 gmail horror.
     
    no.top.post, Oct 14, 2012
    #18
  19. no.top.post

    Bob Hauck Guest

    You can attach multiple aliases to a Gmail account.

    They do POP and IMAP too.
     
    Bob Hauck, Oct 14, 2012
    #19
  20. no.top.post

    Chris Davies Guest

    You're hearing me but missing what I'm trying to suggest!

    You have stated that you can receive messages sent to your old ISP's
    email address. You have also stated that you're struggling to find
    any way of using your current ISP to send email addresses at all, and
    (reasonably enough) you can't use your old ISP to send email. So there's
    no problem keeping your existing (old) email address. The difficulty is
    in finding somewhere/somehow to send email messages.

    My suggestion is to use Gmail's SMTP service to allow you to send messages
    using your old email address. You authenticate using your Gmail
    credentials, but the message has a "From: " header of your old
    address. This then bypasses any email service offered by your current
    broken ISP, and avoids the need to try and use your old ISP (which you
    can't anyway).

    Chris
     
    Chris Davies, Oct 14, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.