That's got to be a first for me too (*updates spamassasin*) but also

Absolutely zero point in doing this. You'll be lucky if the Police are interested in even taking the complaint, and even if they do, you can be sure at most you'll just be a statistic. Basically the Police are only interested if someone is in immediate harm, and even then I wouldn't be confident in getting a response. But I deviate from the point of this list, network operations. -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Enright [mailto:glenn.enright(a)gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2007 8:51 a.m. To: nznog Subject: Re: [nznog] New spam type - death threats? Alternatively, while you might not take it too seriously, under law its a pretty big deal. Personal death threats are a criminal offence. I'd be forwarding it on to the local authorities, even if it proves impossible to trace the email. On 22/08/07, Barry Murphy wrote: the

funniest thing i've ever seen, thanks for sharing :)

Regards Barry Murphy ...

The police really don't have the resources or know how to follow up on a complaint such as this.. I really don't think it will go much further than an "oh yes, we know.. we're doing something about that for sure!" Cheers _____ From: Pete gmail [mailto:siabost(a)gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 12:53 PM To: NZ Network Operators Group Subject: Re: [nznog] New spam type - death threats? Philip, you are way out of line. This is a death threat and must be reported to the police, and chased to make sure they do act. We are about the only group who would laugh at this type of threat. Many people would feel threatened (phishing attacks do have successes) even though they would think it mistaken identity. Scott, how about keeping us informed of how the police react? I must admit I found the Yahoo travel ad at the end rather deliciously amusing. Regards Pete Macaulay Philip D'Ath wrote: Absolutely zero point in doing this. You'll be lucky if the Police are interested in even taking the complaint, and even if they do, you can be sure at most you'll just be a statistic. Basically the Police are only interested if someone is in immediate harm, and even then I wouldn't be confident in getting a response. But I deviate from the point of this list, network operations. -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Enright [mailto:glenn.enright(a)gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2007 8:51 a.m. To: nznog Subject: Re: [nznog] New spam type - death threats? Alternatively, while you might not take it too seriously, under law its a pretty big deal. Personal death threats are a criminal offence. I'd be forwarding it on to the local authorities, even if it proves impossible to trace the email. On 22/08/07, Barry Murphy mailto:barry(a)unix.co.nz wrote: That's got to be a first for me too (*updates spamassasin*) but also the funniest thing i've ever seen, thanks for sharing :) Regards Barry Murphy ... _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

On 22/08/07, Mark Harris wrote:

But is it a _personal_ death threat if it's been sent to 15 million other addresses as well?

Surely, unless its got 15 million other adresses in the sender field... -- See my blog at http://snap-happy3216.blogspot.com

Sorry for replying to my own post, but have you also noticed that the MX servers for xtra now reside in Oz? This will surely increase the international requirements for many providers sending lots of email to @xtra domains. Regards Barry

Hey Guys,

Anyone else running a large mailserver seing these errors? I've gone to the URL, clicked the form to fill out but it wants me to signup, which I refuse to do, mail does finally go through in batchs however queues for a number of hours, then stops all new messages again and then lets batchs through again.

2007-08-22 11:59:22 1INdcx-0006E3-P3 SMTP error from remote mail server after initial connection: host mx1.tnz.mail.yahoo.com [124.108.96.67]: 421 Message from (60.234.68.30) temporarily deferred - 4.16.50. Please refer to http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-06.html 2007-08-22 11:59:22 1INdcx-0006E3-P3 == xxxxxx(a)xtra.co.nz R=lookuphost T=remote_smtp defer (0): SMTP error from remote mail server after initial connection: host mx1.tnz.mail.yahoo.com [124.108.96.67]: 421 Message from (60.234.68.30) temporarily deferred - 4.16.50. Please refer to http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-06.html

Regards Barry Murphy

_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

On 8/22/07, Richard Hector wrote:

Perhaps a little off topic, but I'm not sure I like the privacy implications of sending NZ internal email unnecessarily offshore, and presumably outside the jurisdiction of our Privacy Act ...

Richard

They talked a little about this on Campbell Live last night. It's in one of these two segments (amongst other things): http://www.tv3.co.nz/VideoBrowseAll/CampbellLiveVideo/tabid/367/articleID/32... http://www.tv3.co.nz/VideoBrowseAll/CampbellLiveVideo/tabid/367/articleID/32... Ian -- Web1: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/ Web2: http://www.jandi.co.nz Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz

On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 12:34 +1200, jamie baddeley wrote:

On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 12:19 +1200, Richard Hector wrote:

...

On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 12:05 +1200, Barry Murphy wrote:

...

Sorry for replying to my own post, but have you also noticed that the MX servers for xtra now reside in Oz? This will surely increase the international requirements for many providers sending lots of email to @xtra domains.

Perhaps a little off topic, but I'm not sure I like the privacy implications of sending NZ internal email unnecessarily offshore, and presumably outside the jurisdiction of our Privacy Act ...

gmail/hotmail anyone?

I'm well aware (though I accept that others may not be) that those are not NZ companies, and that mail through there is likely to go offshore. It seems reasonable to assume that Xtra is local, for someone of moderate technical knowledge. Richard

You'd expect when the ISP starts talking about "29 Peering Points" and that they now understand the need to keep traffic local, the departments would be talking together before making such statements. Personally I don't care, yes I'll be sending a little more traffic abroad, but when it comes to international speed issues which everyone sees every now and then, they will start loosing clients. The best solution would be for Xtra to advertise the yahoo mail servers locally across either their domestic peering arrangements or across APE/WIX, though we wont go into the whole peering discussion again. What will be next, all the RAN's hosted in sydney? Regards Barry

The Internet is global - any concepts about locality disappeared about 10 years ago when companies discovered they could get web hosting in the US for a fraction of the cost of this side of the globe.

Originally this was pretty much only for websites, but as this thread shows it's happening more and more for mail and other services today - both for the outsourcing of the mail side itself, but also for services such as anti-spam/anti-virus. Many companies wouldnt even consider doing such a thing, but ISP, Edu and many business aren't in that list...

Scott.

_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

On 8/22/07, Barry Murphy wrote:

Sorry for replying to my own post, but have you also noticed that the MX servers for xtra now reside in Oz? This will surely increase the international requirements for many providers sending lots of email to @xtra domains.

Yep, according to my passive DNS database they changed the MX records on Saturday morning (first resolved request happened at Fri, 17 Aug 2007 21:39:31 UTC). The new servers are indeed in Oz - probably because Yahoo doesn't have anything in NZ ... Regarding the errors you're seeing - you should probably see similar things with any domains Yahoo hosts. Cheers, Bojan

Yep, im seeing a similar error - "too many invalid recipients from this host" Aug 19 13:51:24 sol2 qmail: 1187488284.019447 delivery 21065: deferral: Connected_to_124.108.96.67_but_greeting_failed./Remote_host_said:_421_Messag e_from_(203.89.183.2)_temporarily_deferred_-_4.16.50._Please_refer_to_http:/ /help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-06.html/ And... Aug 19 13:34:16 sol2 qmail: 1187487256.168245 delivery 21016: deferral: Connected_to_124.108.96.67_but_sender_was_rejected./Remote_host_said:_451_VS 5-MF_Excessive_unknown_recipients_-_possible_Open_Relay_http://help.yahoo.co m/help/us/mail/spam/spam-18.html_(#4.4.5)_998sherm27(a)jenkinsbrush.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Barry Murphy [mailto:barry(a)unix.co.nz] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 12:04 PM To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: [nznog] Xtra email - mx1.tnz.mail.yahoo.com Hey Guys, Anyone else running a large mailserver seing these errors? I've gone to the URL, clicked the form to fill out but it wants me to signup, which I refuse to do, mail does finally go through in batchs however queues for a number of hours, then stops all new messages again and then lets batchs through again. 2007-08-22 11:59:22 1INdcx-0006E3-P3 SMTP error from remote mail server after initial connection: host mx1.tnz.mail.yahoo.com [124.108.96.67]: 421 Message from (60.234.68.30) temporarily deferred - 4.16.50. Please refer to http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-06.html 2007-08-22 11:59:22 1INdcx-0006E3-P3 == xxxxxx(a)xtra.co.nz R=lookuphost T=remote_smtp defer (0): SMTP error from remote mail server after initial connection: host mx1.tnz.mail.yahoo.com [124.108.96.67]: 421 Message from (60.234.68.30) temporarily deferred - 4.16.50. Please refer to http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-06.html Regards Barry Murphy _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

Quoting lengsc(a)coretech.co.nz:

the issue with yahoo mail servers is known and we ran into the same problem some time ago in germany. i just mailed my guys over there for confirmation but the way we dealt with it (at least i think we did) was to limit the connection rates to yahoo/xtra (config value in postfix, should be there in other MTAs as well). i'll post a more detailed thing when the germans woke up :-)

i just had a chat and the results are not so straight forward as i had them in mind. actually the rate limiting was no permanent soloution as our queues ran full over the time. we managed to whitelist our servers at yahoo finally which is obviously the best soloution. we have an overall mail traffic volume of about 2TB/month and holding the growing spool was a real pain. i had another look at the log lines posted originally and just wanted to mention that yahoo uses greylisting, however they also have that "Excessive unknown recipients" message, therefor you have to get whitelisted. greets lenz