Brought here from a PM;

I am trying to figure out why the 69.151.131.153 is being blocked. I did the ip lookup and it said it was not blocked however when we try and email a customer we get a blocked message. Can you help? the message is below. This might not be the best way for help but, I have been unable to figure out how to get help.

xxxxx.xxxxxx[at]vernierlaw.com on 2/27/2006 6:50 PM
You do not have permission to send to this recipient. For assistance, contact your system administrator.
<baicltd.com #5.7.1 smtp;501 5.7.1 <xxxxxxxx[at]baicltd.com>... Sender refused by the DNSBL bl.spamcop.net>

We need more complete information from the bounce message you received. It is probably an SWBell/SBC/AT&T mailserver that's actually blocked, rather than your ADSL's IP Address adsl-69-151-131-153.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net [69.151.131.153]. Please see Why Am I Blocked? FAQ for more information. Thanks!

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...=69.151.131.153
69.151.131.153 not listed in bl.spamcop.net

http://www.senderbase.org/?searchBy=ipaddr...=69.151.131.153
No address list shown since no email was detected from 69.151.131.0/24

02/28/06 20:21:51 Slow traceroute 69.151.131.153
Trace 69.151.131.153 ...
151.164.188.10 RTT: 52ms TTL:224 (bb1-p10-2.hstntx.sbcglobal.net ok)
151.164.43.41 RTT: 55ms TTL:224 (dist1-g1-1.hstntx.sbcglobal.net ok)
151.164.11.106 RTT: 56ms TTL:224 (bras2-g9-0.hstntx.sbcglobal.net ok)
69.151.131.153 RTT: 104ms TTL:232 (adsl-69-151-131-153.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net ok)

ns26b.sbc-webhosting.com reports the following MX records:
Preference Host Name IP Address
50 mail.baicltd.com 69.151.131.153



02/28/06 21:37:07 Slow traceroute baicltd.com
Trace baicltd.com (64.143.172.246) ...

Perhaps someone else might try to look up some history, but the appearances are that there may be a bit of something not quite right in someone's configuration.

SenderBase states that no e-mail traffic has been seen from that IP address, yet the error message you provided states that this is an outgoing e-mail server. The Domain in question has been around for a while, so it's not that things are 'brand new' that would cause an issue.

I guess the real question might be how your e-mail server is actually set-up. Usually, the MX data seen above would be true for the incoming e-mail, but the outgoing is a different story. That the IP address tracks back to an DSL line kind of suggests that this account would "normally" use a 'shared' e-mail server ran by swbell, which would then leave you at the mercy of any and all other swbell users that were also 'assigned' to that server. However, it appears that someone has elected to plave an e-mail server somewhere else. Too many other things going on here, so am not going to try to sort all that out.

On the other hand, one could also go with the possible mis-configuration at the receiving ISP .... using a DUP (Dial-Up) list to block e-mail traffic from a server not actually identified as a "real" e-mail server, but having the 'error code' picking up the wrong response message .. specifically using the "blocked by SpamCop" tag instead of a "blocked by xxxx list" ....

PM sent to advise that this Topic has been opened up 'here'

This is a 2003 Small Business Server on a static ip DSL from SBC. do you have any other suggestions?

Under the SmallBusiness SMTP connector, on the General tab, which do you have selected:

Use DNS to route to each address space on this connector
Forward all mail through this connector to the following smart hosts

If you are using smart hosts, then you are at the mercy of the SBC smart host you are using, and SBC is one of the spammiest hosts in the business, so it will be blocked most of the time.

If you are using DNS to route your messages, then your server is sending directly to the receiving MX without using an intermediary. This is by far the best option if you are on a static IP. You will need to make sure that you have the appropriate PTR record. Usually this takes about 3 calls to SBC support and a couple arguments that YES, SBC sets up a PTR record, not your registrar before it gets done... At least that has been my experience.

That step has already been completed: