Discuss Digest, Vol 2, Issue 31

[lug at the-leveys.us (Don Levey)]

discuss-bounces at blu.org wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 09:52:59PM -0500, Robert L Krawitz wrote:
>> I would take exception to the lack of options.  I have Speakeasy
>> (which doesn't have such onerous terms)
>
> And also isn't that widely available.  I've known a number of people
> who wanted to get Speakeasy DSL, but were unable to.  They are the
> only high-speed provider in the area I am aware of which does not have
> such a TOS, so I have to agree with Rich that there generally are a
> lack of options...
>
In some areas, yes.  So convince someone else to move in, or start your own
service company. But telling the one outfit who DOES move into your area
that not only doesn't their offering suit you, but you'll use it anyway and
then demand that they change to suit you is a little... presumtious.

> You just happen to be lucky enough to have the only real option
> available.
>
>> Quite honestly, I'm a lot more bothered by these "reasonable" limits
>> on traffic volume and general no-server (ftp, web) policies than I am
>> by blocking of port 25 outbound.
>
> What's the difference?  You need the port unblocked to run a mail
> server...

No, you don't.  Not outbound port 25, anyway.  Unless I'm imagining it, my
messages are coming through just fine from a server within the RCN network.
You can contact my server directly via *inbound* port 25, and outbound I
communicate with you via RCN's mail server.

When they first implemented this, I called them up and asked.  I put forward
the position that when I send mail from home I often need to contact my
office's mail server directly via port 25, and now this option was lost.
They told me that I could use their servers, that they did not care or
otherwise control the name of the server from which I connected.  The end
result is that my outgoing mail goes through, and from a server that tends
to be well-respected in the spam-fighting world.  Had I known this was an
option at the outset, I would never have even bothered to set up my home
server to go directly out on port 25, since so many places do block on the
dynamic IPs.  And I get incoming mail without a problem, and so I can run
SpamAssassin and ClamAV (as well as a large list of custom
blocking/filtering tables) to keep me and my users safe.

 -Don