I attempted to reply to a message from Alan
and got the following response.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Undeliverable mail: Re: Linux 2.4.0test11-ac2
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 11:46:54 -0800
From: [email protected]
To: <[email protected]>
Failed to deliver to '[email protected]'
SMTP module(domain lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk) reports:
host lightning.swansea.uk.linux.org says:
550 rejected: administrative prohibition
>>>>> "Miles" == Miles Lane <[email protected]> writes:
Miles> I attempted to reply to a message from Alan and got the
Miles> following response.
No it isn't, Alan uses ORBS and you are obviously black listed there
(http://www.orbs.org).
This one seems to come up every now and then, and always turns into a
flamewar. Now it's Alan's choice so if you want to argue over this,
take it somewhere else please.
Who is maintaining the FAQ? this might be a good idea to add to under
the mailing list section.
Jes
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, Miles Lane wrote:
> I attempted to reply to a message from Alan
> and got the following response.
> SMTP module(domain lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk) reports:
> host lightning.swansea.uk.linux.org says:
> 550 rejected: administrative prohibition
You're in ORBS. Fix your open relay and get out of ORBS ...
cheers,
Rik
--
Hollywood goes for world dumbination,
Trailer at 11.
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, Miles Lane wrote:
> host lightning.swansea.uk.linux.org says:
> 550 rejected: administrative prohibition
I think this one needs to go into the FAQ!
Q: When I send private e-mail to Alan Cox, it bounces. Why?
A: Alan has blocked all incoming e-mail except from a list of addresses
known to be good. You'll need to post to the list to be seen by him.
Cheers,
Alex
--
Run away!
http://www.tahallah.clara.co.uk
> Q: When I send private e-mail to Alan Cox, it bounces. Why?
> A: Alan has blocked all incoming e-mail except from a list of addresses
> known to be good. You'll need to post to the list to be seen by him.
Try
A: Alan like many people filters mail using the MAPS RBL, DUL and ORBS
spam relay lists. See http://www.mail-abuse.org and http://www.orbs.org for
more information
Okay, please explain why ORBS tells me it does *not*
identify my ISP's SMTP server as an open relay?
mail.megapathdsl.net = 216.200.176.7
ORBS says:
Database Check - 216.200.176.7
216.200.176.7 is not in the main automated
open relay database
Thanks,
Miles
Alan Cox wrote:
>> Okay, please explain why ORBS tells me it does *not*
>> identify my ISP's SMTP server as an open relay?
>>
>> mail.megapathdsl.net = 216.200.176.7
>
>
> Your mail goes out via your isps outgoing feed ns1.megapath.net
> which is in ORBS (216.200.176.4)
Thank you,
I will go pummel my ISP's technical staff into the
pavement until this is fixed.
Cheerio,
Miles
Yo Miles!
Well I see 216.200.176.7 in ORBS:
$ chk-rly 216.200.176.7
rbl.maps.vix.com =>
rss.maps.vix.com =>
dul.maps.vix.com =>
relays.orbs.org => 127.0.0.4
relays.orbs.org => untestable - above.net has multiple open relays and has blocked the ORBS tester.
outputs.orbs.org =>
RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 20340 Empire Ave, Suite E-3, Bend, OR 97701
[email protected] Tel:+1(541)382-8588 Fax: +1(541)382-8676
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, Miles Lane wrote:
> Okay, please explain why ORBS tells me it does *not*
> identify my ISP's SMTP server as an open relay?
>
> mail.megapathdsl.net = 216.200.176.7
Jes Sorensen writes:
> >>>>> "Miles" == Miles Lane <[email protected]> writes:
>
> Miles> I attempted to reply to a message from Alan and got the
> Miles> following response.
>
> No it isn't, Alan uses ORBS and you are obviously black listed there
> (http://www.orbs.org).
>
> This one seems to come up every now and then, and always turns into a
> flamewar. Now it's Alan's choice so if you want to argue over this,
> take it somewhere else please.
>
> Who is maintaining the FAQ? this might be a good idea to add to
> under the mailing list section.
[Raises hand] Send me a patch. And see section 5.14, which has been
there for some time.
BTW: you never did get around to sending me a patch for why C++ in the
kernel was evil ;-)
Regards,
Richard....
Permanent: [email protected]
Current: [email protected]