Jump to content

dibz

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About dibz

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. yes probably, it just appears to be that IP that is later causing the issue... or rather that of host212-183-132-39.uk.access.vodafone.net
  2. given this forum is public read i have removed a couple of things but most is in tact (probs still way too much but hey ho) Received: from hostedexchange.hostedservice.com ([192.168.16.27]) by <deleted> with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 3 Nov 2006 12:53:58 +0000 Received: from GW1.hostedservice.com ([192.168.26.5]) by hostedexchange.hostedservice.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 3 Nov 2006 12:53:57 +0000 Received: from mail.letsdrive.com (adi.onyxnet.co.uk [195.97.193.8]) by GW1.hostedservice.com (spam Firewall) with SMTP id 54854EC71C2 for <user[at]lvg.co.uk>; Fri, 3 Nov 2006 12:53:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: (qmail 27832 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2006 12:53:54 -0000 Received: from host212-183-132-39.uk.access.vodafone.net (HELO ?10.167.98.131?) (user[at]letsdrive.com[at]212.183.132.39) by adi.onyxnet.co.uk with SMTP; 3 Nov 2006 12:53:54 -0000 its this final Received line that is the culpret, not sure i understand it tho'... note the IP (212.183.132.39) is another shared remote host ip, not one of "ours". also something that throws me is the IP on the HELO, 10.x.x.x is a private address? why would it be reported on a HELO...
  3. little more info, just had a look at a mail header of an email from one of the remote guys (strangely enough, one that got through originially reporting the block!) and in the header, the sender appears to be fully qualified as: person[at]ourdomain[at]roamingip i am starting to wonder if the provider of our SMTP service is passing on too much information!! ideally speaking the receiver doesn't need to know the information behind the second [at], might be something that can be truncated/disabled/whatever. i have also started communication with the exchange hosts who are the ones using spamcop to see if anything can be done at that end. I will replay back here if I find a resolution in all this, incase it can be of use for others.
  4. i think you may have hit the nail on the head there Will. Our exchange server is in itself a hosted service, there was talk and maybe plan of migrating the 'field ops' mx records to the same hosted service and bringing everything under one roof (so to speak) but it just isn't viable at this time. I don't think we have an email header available at this time that we could check... I will have a look I think the answer I have stumbled blindly to with all your help and advice is to re-contact the exchange hosts (who originally said they didn't do anything with spamcop...) and see if they will modify how it checks mail headers or at least get the other smtp-auth server added to a safe list if that is possible.
  5. dbiel, i accept the tone of your email as unneccessary but it seems i may not have been clear. The field agents have email accounts with one service hosted at letsdrive.com from which they use POP and Authorised SMTP. They are sending mail to employees based on site who utilise exchange through the lvg.co.uk domain. At this time, the field agents are required to keep their current mail services. When an internet connection is unavailable to them, they use wireless datacards to provide an internet connection, but they still use the authenticated SMTP hosted at letsdrive.com, the IP address that is being blocked and reported etc etc above is that from a shared pool, relating to the dynamic internet connection from the roaming host. They don't use an SMTP service provided by the roaming hosts, I don't even know if that host provides an SMTP service. It is here where I don't understand why email is being blocked as shouldn't it be coming from the known source that is letsdrive.com? Our email services are not hosted by ourselves, which is the route of this issue as we are not in control of the spam and virus countermeasures they choose to employ.
  6. Many many thanks for the help and info folks, you have saved me from tearing my hair out! Strange how everyone we have spoken to has denied knowledge when in fact there is a link in the chain connected with spamcop! thanks for the info, I will relay to those that need and see where we go from here. Thanks again, ~Dibz Edit: Just seen your edit Will, letsdrive.com is set up for authenticated SMTP. I have a feeling that isn't configured for Reverse DNS too as historically some accounts have had intermittant problems sending to AOL
  7. ah ok From: System Administrator Subject: Undeliverable: 311006 Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: 311006 Sent: 31/10/2006 18:56 The following recipient(s) could not be reached: 'someone[at]lvg.co.uk' on 31/10/2006 18:56 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?212.183.134.65 was the error the sender received... he was sending from a [at]letsdrive.com account
  8. I am hoping you can help as I am currently at a bit of a loss. We are having a problem at the moment whereby some of our field operatives are unable to send email back to headoffice (and elsewhere) as they are getting blocked (error returned that the ip is on spamcop's block list), but neither of our mail domains are linked to spamcop as far as we know. The current constant is that it 'appears' as though the field agents only encounter problems when connecting through a roaming service (they have 3g datacards provided by vodafone). We have spoken to both mail providers and vodafone and all claim to know nothing about spamcop, so my question is this really... How is spamcop getting involved, when no component of the communications channel makes any connection/reference to spamcop?
×