Hi all,
My new mailinglist server is blocked by Microsoft (S3150).
I have a SNDS account and my IP range has status 'normal'.
Sumitting a support request here
https://support.microsoft.com/supportrequestform
results in:
- - -
Access Denied
You don't have permission to access
> RIPE says it's IPXO Limited, at a mail drop in suburban London, a phone
> number in Lithuania, and a tech contact at an address in Paris with
> no hint that he works there. Sounds totally legit to me.
IPXO Ltd (London) is Heficed (Lithuania). According to their home page,
they are a "Fully
It appears that Scott Mutter via mailop said:
>Email - as we know it - should have been dead years ago. But instead we
>keep adding band-aid after band-aid after band-aid to the system.
>
>Why is it impossible to take a look at what Instant Messaging protocols,
>SMTP, SMS do that make them
As someone else already pointed out..
Your 'rwhois' could use updating.
Currently it suggest ab...@heficed.com, but there is no abuse contact
field in the standard fields.
'Within' your IP Space, could you be clearer on your IP space?
And the phone number is in Lithunia. Transparency is
Thanks a lot for bringing this up! The range appears to have been hijacked.
We have checked and it seems this subnet has been continued to be illegally
used past service termination. We have taken all necessary actions to handle it
and take the network down.
We will work on strengthening our
On 2/2/2022 10:31 PM, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote:
> A lot of the issues stem from the way IT managers, and maybe technology
> managers in general bathe in arrogance. "There's no such thing as a
> good idea, unless it is *my* idea." It's easier to get blood out of a
> stone than for someone in
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 5:50 PM yuv via mailop wrote:
>
> > Not law, documentation. RFC5321 describes the state of SMTP, as of
> > 2008, sorta. How it was working best then, to the degree that the
> > editor and authors could reach consensus. The changes from 2821 to
> > 5321 are clarifications,
On 3/2/22 13:59, Andrew C Aitchison via mailop wrote:
To me any system that aims to replace email must be based on pushing
messages and have a distributed nature.
This means that deliverability issues are an inherent risk, in a way
that pulling messages from a central/unified service can avoid.
> Email - as we know it - should have been dead years ago. But instead we
> keep adding band-aid after band-aid after band-aid to the system.
It's not that people haven't tried. And not all of them have been
wholly unequipped to do so, either. You are of course aware of Professor
Dan J.
Dnia 3.02.2022 o godz. 11:59:42 Andrew C Aitchison via mailop pisze:
>
> Having said that, my understanding is that deliverability is also an
> issue in Facebook. If some of my posts are not shown to some of my friends,
> without them telling Facebook that they did not want to see those
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote:
A lot of the issues stem from the way IT managers, and maybe technology
managers in general bathe in arrogance. "There's no such thing as a good
idea, unless it is *my* idea." It's easier to get blood out of a stone
than for someone in IT to
Dnia 2.02.2022 o godz. 21:31:04 Scott Mutter via mailop pisze:
> Instant
> messaging and SMS can't as easily be spoofed, they may be fake but senders
> have to register on the platform in some way
Here in Poland we are now right in the middle of a real-life "experiment"
that will probably show
12 matches
Mail list logo
