--=-EqpyBAV61hcMNaNmT9+c
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 18:57, Augie Grayfox wrote:
> *v*The reason they should have given is you are trying to relay mail. A
> *v*tactic that most spammers have used for years. They consider you as a
> *v*spammer and should block your mail. I certainly would if I were them.=
=3D20
> *v*Relays are bad news and cause other customers grief.
> *v*
> How the HELL is sending an email from my @cox address to my client's @xxx=
.com=20
> address be considered relaying?
> I thought that was just emailing somebody?
Well I can configure my boxes to send @cox email to @xxx.com and have it
be a relay. Just because you have an address of @cox doesn't mean you
are not relaying.
Now if you have things configured on your side to directly use their
mail servers and not route through so it looks like a relay, then yeah
you have a legitimate gripe and I apologize. I have never seen a
"relay" error where the host wasn't relaying. Perhaps they have their
end that severely mis-configured.
> By your reasoning and apparantly cox' anybody that sends ANY email is rel=
aying=20
> therefore a spammer
> PULLLEEEEASE get real!
I don't know your setup, but for right or wrong I would suspect if they
have internal relay problems, they would have enough Windows customers
pissed off they would be trying to fix it. Fortunately or unfortunately
GNU/Linux generally comes with mail servers of its own and its easy to
accidently misconfigure them. If you have everything configured
correctly and they really are that fscked up, I apologize and you have
every right to be pissed.
> The only reason I mentioned this was to basically rant about crappie tech=
=20
> support that seems to unduly single out Linux users.=20
I haven't experienced this. In fact, they have been quite a bit better
than most. They don't do anything to "help", but they don't refuse to
talk to me because I simply run GNU/Linux.
> I'm sorry if I ruffled any feathers for badmouthing anybody's favorite IS=
P and=20
> no I'm not switching from cox, been with them for years. I may continue t=
o=20
> use them, but that don't mean I have to like they're discriminatory treat=
ment=20
> of non m$ users.
Um I they are not my favorite by a long shot. Read the archives. I
always recommend getting VDSL first and DSL second if one has the
choice. I would not have Cox at all if I had either V/DSL available to
me.
--=20
Derek Neighbors
GNU Enterprise
http://www.gnuenterprise.org
derek@gnue.org
Was I helpful? Let others know:
http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=3Ddneighbo
--=-EqpyBAV61hcMNaNmT9+c
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQBAHI+xHb99+vQX/88RAuaFAJ9234mMKOTpfcl/kKLfiM+yBcnMsQCdGCnt
BydAtw7rZjHT0akScCVFRAE=
=0zIs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-EqpyBAV61hcMNaNmT9+c--
(text/plain)