XTRA, blacklisted by 'mail.com' --- WHY?

Chris Wedgwood

16 Jun 2001 16 Jun '01

7:51 p.m.

At present, some of my outband email is sent through XTRA's mail-server(s) as they block outgoing SMTP access when you are inflicted with Jetstream/Jetstart through Xtra. Not that I really mind all that much, it works pretty much flawlessly and Xtra are arguably being good people by blocking nasty evil users from injecting spam into other peoples open-relays (perhaps they block other ports too --- maybe someone from Xtra can comment?). Now, this just occured, which again doesn't really bother me in this instance, but I am curious as to _why_ this was blocked. The DSN I received says this: Reporting-MTA: dns; balthamel.xtra.co.nz Arrival-Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 23:13:47 +1200 Received-From-MTA: dns; tapu (210.55.42.93) Final-Recipient: RFC822; Action: failed Status: 5.1.3 Remote-MTA: dns; mail-com-bk.mr.outblaze.com (205.158.62.36) Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 553 5.3.0 Mail from 203.96.92.15 refused. Blacklisted. yet when I check the common 'blacklisting' mechanisms I find nothing: tapu:~$ rblcheck 203.96.92.15 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by blackholes.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by dialups.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by relays.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by inputs.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by outputs.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by manual.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by spamsources.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by untestable-netblocks.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by spamsource-netblocks.orbs.org so I wonder what else is out there that is used to blacklist evil people? And why is Xtra in this list? --cw --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Show replies by date

Hamish MacEwan

17 Jun 17 Jun

3 a.m.

On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 00:51 +1200, Chris Wedgwood wrote:

...

At present, some of my outband email is sent through XTRA's mail-server(s) as they block outgoing SMTP access when you are inflicted with Jetstream/Jetstart through Xtra.

No blocking that I'm aware of. And I've been a customer of both, and currently use Jetstart/stop/start/stop (<grin>, a couple of outages here in WN over the last week). I still like the control and early warning of problems it offers me over handing it off to Xtra. The only "indignity" I have suffered wrt to SMTP was MAPS DUL blocking the IP address I was allocated, deservedly, and while I can understand people blocking relaying, I was disappointed to find that Paradise blocked for delivery too. The issue has been happily resolved in the Paradise case, thanks to Mark, and somebody at Xtra assures me that they will arrange for the DUL to be removed.

...

Now, this just occured, which again doesn't really bother me in this instance, but I am curious as to _why_ this was blocked.

I was too, and MAPS obliged with an example of spam that had gone through. MAPS was disappointing in that the URL their SMTP server offered by way of explanation didn't work, and when I queried the DUL it said it knew nothing about my IP either. Spam is not bad enough a problem for these shoddy services to be taken seriously, and where I might have thought Xtra irresponsible in the past to eschew them, my thinking now is on the other foot. How responsible is it for an ISP to refuse *delivery* on the word of a third-party who can be fed information from ?

...

yet when I check the common 'blacklisting' mechanisms I find nothing:

Yes, once it was hard enough to get this stuff working at all, and now we add these "transparent" barriers that often block the innocent and are beyond the wise to understand.

...

so I wonder what else is out there that is used to blacklist evil people? And why is Xtra in this list?

I guess we all do, but once the oxymoron of "blocking to improve communcation" (a la "fighting for peace," "destroying the village to save it" etc. etc.) is accepted, there's really no end to it.

...

--cw

PS. I acknowlege that I was an open relay, for a couple of days, which makes me no more evil I guess than John Gilmore (http://www.toad.com/gnu/verio-censorship.html), and that the correspondence I had with MAPS was non-judgemental and helpful. -- There is nothing with which every man is so afraid as getting to know how enormously much he is capable of doing and becoming. -- Soren Kierkegaard --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Simon Lyall

3:11 a.m.

On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Hamish MacEwan wrote:

...

The only "indignity" I have suffered wrt to SMTP was MAPS DUL blocking the IP address I was allocated, deservedly, and while I can understand people blocking relaying, I was disappointed to find that Paradise blocked for delivery too.

The issue has been happily resolved in the Paradise case, thanks to Mark, and somebody at Xtra assures me that they will arrange for the DUL to be removed.

I was wondering why this should be removed. AFAIK Jetstart is a dynamicly allocated broadband service. Sure the networks on that are exactly what the DUL is supposed to list. After the MAPs DUL started listed our networks at random I sent them a correct list. I would hate to think other ISPs a being dishonest and getting their networks removed when they should be included. NOTE: ihug doesn't currently use any of the 3rd party lists to filter email. -- Simon Lyall. | Newsmaster | Work: simon.lyall(a)ihug.co.nz Senior Network/System Admin | Postmaster | Home: simon(a)darkmere.gen.nz ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Simon Blake

5:47 a.m.

On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Hamish MacEwan wrote:

...

The only "indignity" I have suffered wrt to SMTP was MAPS DUL blocking the IP address I was allocated, deservedly, and while I can understand people blocking relaying, I was disappointed to find that Paradise blocked for delivery too.

Huh? The DUL *is* for blocking delivery, not relaying - the implication (that they should only use it to block relaying) is that you think Paradise should allow relaying for everything else?

...

How responsible is it for an ISP to refuse *delivery* on the word of a third-party who can be fed information from ?

It's their choice. Customers can always walk the walk, if they don't like the particular subset of the net that their particular ISP chooses to let them talk to. For better or worse, the DUL does work pretty well - every day, my mail server drops a couple of dozen mails based on DUL entries. Given that the users on my server aren't backwards in coming forwards when they don't get mail they were expecting (they're mainly staff), I can only conclude that the majority of mail being blocked by DUL entries is unsolicited. Cheers Si --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Hamish MacEwan

6:15 a.m.

On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 10:47 +1200, Simon Blake wrote:

...

Huh? The DUL *is* for blocking delivery, not relaying - the implication (that they should only use it to block relaying) is that you think Paradise should allow relaying for everything else?

Oh, I had hoped delivery, which is rather more limited in it's harm (given I am delivering to a customer, and it's properly the customers choice whether they want it or not), and I thought more traceable as to it's origin, plus as relaying is the reason I was blocked, and relaying seems to be the big bogie these services want controlled, then I concluded delivery might be regarded more "leniently?" than a relay request. I'm not sure how you derived the idea that I "think Paradise should allow relaying for everything else?" but I hope there is no need for me to explicitly disagree with that, but I do anyway.

...

It's their choice. Customers can always walk the walk, if they don't like the particular subset of the net that their particular ISP chooses to let them talk to.

I certainly didn't mean to suggest they couldn't choose to, on the contrary, I'm *very* pro-choice, isn't that why we have the Net? I queried whether it was responsible. And since it is a choice for the ISP, why can it not also be a choice for the recipient?

...

For better or worse, the DUL does work pretty well - every day, my mail server drops a couple of dozen mails based on DUL entries. Given that the users on my server aren't backwards in coming forwards when they don't get mail they were expecting (they're mainly staff), I can only conclude that the majority of mail being blocked by DUL entries is unsolicited.

Well, OK, your choice, and I did mean to emphasise that the recipient might be offered a choice about this. I understood the target was more specific than "unsolicited?" I was lead to believe by the rhetoric that it was "unsolicited commercial email" that was intended to be blocked. Not me, delivering to a single recipient.

...

Si

Hamish. -- It is human nature to take credit for success and blame circumstances for failure. --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Juha Saarinen

3:34 a.m.

Possibly fall-out from the ORBS debacle, although I've noticed that sending mail to Outblaze is next to impossible from any APNIC IP -- certainly can't do so from Paradise, and there's a big wodge of messages stuck in the mail queue on one of IDG's servers. -- Regards, Juha PGP fingerprint: B7E1 CC52 5FCA 9756 B502 10C8 4CD8 B066 12F3 9544 On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Chris Wedgwood wrote:

...

At present, some of my outband email is sent through XTRA's mail-server(s) as they block outgoing SMTP access when you are inflicted with Jetstream/Jetstart through Xtra.

Not that I really mind all that much, it works pretty much flawlessly and Xtra are arguably being good people by blocking nasty evil users from injecting spam into other peoples open-relays (perhaps they block other ports too --- maybe someone from Xtra can comment?).

Now, this just occured, which again doesn't really bother me in this instance, but I am curious as to _why_ this was blocked. The DSN I received says this:

Reporting-MTA: dns; balthamel.xtra.co.nz Arrival-Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 23:13:47 +1200 Received-From-MTA: dns; tapu (210.55.42.93)

Final-Recipient: RFC822; Action: failed Status: 5.1.3 Remote-MTA: dns; mail-com-bk.mr.outblaze.com (205.158.62.36) Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 553 5.3.0 Mail from 203.96.92.15 refused. Blacklisted.

yet when I check the common 'blacklisting' mechanisms I find nothing:

tapu:~$ rblcheck 203.96.92.15 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by blackholes.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by dialups.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by relays.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by inputs.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by outputs.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by manual.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by spamsources.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by untestable-netblocks.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by spamsource-netblocks.orbs.org

so I wonder what else is out there that is used to blacklist evil people? And why is Xtra in this list?

--cw

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

8589

Age (days ago)

8589

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

5 comments

5 participants

participants (5)

Chris Wedgwood
Hamish MacEwan
Juha Saarinen
Simon Blake
Simon Lyall