Jump to content

appyface

Members
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

appyface's Achievements

Member

Member (2/6)

0

Reputation

  1. I don't know what you mean, 'taken away'? Yes I used the Cesmail SMTP server and no I didn't apply for anything. I've been using it regularly without failure (to send).
  2. I just tried sending to a Hotmail address now and it came back undeliverable due to blocklist. Seems that this should have been resolved by now? I am submitting a report via webmail 'problem' report and hopefully this will receive some attention soon.
  3. While I completely agree with using one's own ISP's outbound mail server whenever possible, it isn't always possible. For example, my ISP's outbound SMTP mail server will accept mail only if my IP address is assigned by my ISP, in addition to authenticating my userid and password. When I'm not at home, it's unlikely I can use it since my connection is probably not provided by my ISP. I can probably use their webmail interface, which only authenticates my userid and password. But that doesn't give me access to send and receive my Spamcop email. When I'm at work, my employer's outbound SMTP server is blocked from use by all but the corporate email system. And my ISP's webmail site is also blocked by my employer's firewall. So both of those options are out. I'm able to access both Spamcop Webmail and the CESMail outbound SMTP server from work though (go figure). So without them I'd be limited to sending email from my cell phone, or not sending personal email at all, at any time during the workday. This may not be a common scenario, but it's probably not terribly rare either.
  4. I'm still unable to email a hotmail address, at least some of the time. Here's the bounce message from this morning's attempt:
  5. Sabernet's Barracuda anti-spam system is also blocking the outbound mail server due to reports of excessive spam. FWIW I submitted a request to Barracuda to remove the block.
  6. I understand SpamCop greylisting to be working like I'm used to (a la Sneakemail), which means if your test mails are being sent from a correctly-configured server they will not fail the greylisting, ever. The 'false positives' come in to play when a legitimate sender unfortunately has a mail server which is misconfigured and doesn't follow the re-try/re-send per the RFC. I've seen this happen at large and small companies, private or otherwise, as well as email giants like Yahoo or MSN. The legitimate sender is generally not in a position to know that his mail server is misconfigured. All he knows is that his mail to you bounces. If he has only an email address as a contact for you, then it's over... You don't know (without the views Jeff has indicated are coming) that he sent mail to you, and he has no way to tell you it never reached you. --appyface
  7. [at]trevor Your description of how greylisting would work is exactly how Sneakemail does it. The difference is, IF I CHOOSE TO DO SO, I can look at the three views in Sneakemail and see what is happening with any mail at each stage of the greylisting process. That approach won't bother your people that don't care what happens to the mail. And that approach doesn't mean I won't lose legitimate mail, it just means I will be able to KNOW that I lost it. That gives me an opportunity to contact the mail owner and let them know I didn't receive it, and make other arrangements. The sender probably can't contact me, when he/she receives the bounce, because all they have is an email address for me and it isn't going through. I have to be able to contact THEM. In the case of Sneakemail which uses multiple receiving email addresses, I can simply turn off greylisting for that receiving email address until my legitimate sender's server issues are resolved. A good point raised by UltraJoe is to have the SpamCop greylisting ignore addresses already on the whitelist. This would serve pretty much the same function as being able to selectively turn off the greylisting processing. The other bells and whistles mentioned such as editing email addresses, etc. would certainly be nice, but if I could just have the same views as Sneakemail and know that a greylisted mail failed (and why) and then whitelist the sender, that would be good enough control for me to use the feature. Thanks and regards, --appyface
  8. I use Sneakemail and that service has had greylisting for some time; I love it. However, they also have three views of greylisted mail: pendings, windows, and giveups. All views are useful, but the giveups in particular is VERY useful -- it is the only way to see if legitimate mail was bounced because the sender's servers are misconfigured. I didn't see an equivalent being offered here, but perhaps I just missed it. How will SpamCop users know if legitimate mail has been rejected due to server that didn't follow the RFCs and make the window? Thanks and regards, --appyface
×
×
  • Create New...