On 13/02/2014 13:35, Tim Watts wrote:
On Thursday 13 February 2014 13:25 The Natural Philosopher wrote in
uk.d-i-y:

The latter is not actually true - I've been running a mail server
forver (until last year) off a server on ADSL.


IF you have a static IP address with a proper reverse lookup on it,
you have a chance.

Indeed I do - and I do agree that is a reasonable prerequiste.



I run one on a dynamic address and have only had one email rejected for
it being dynamic in about 5 years.
I suspect that the majority of mail servers are using better spam
filters these days.

On 13/02/2014 15:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 13/02/14 14:27, Chris Bartram wrote:
On 13/02/2014 13:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 13/02/14 12:47, Adrian wrote:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 12:00:18 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Except the PP's proposal *would* work (bar any sillyness blocking
outgoing TCP/25 by the ISP).

Yes, it'll work if the ISP permits outgoing port 25, but no self-
respecting ISP would allow that.

All of them do. Allow that.

No, quite a few do/did block 25 outgoing.

bit hard to use their mail relay then.


The point being they allow it *only* to their mail relay.

But not from?



You don't send mail on port 25.
You can send it on any port, to port 25.

On 13/02/14 15:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 13/02/14 14:27, Chris Bartram wrote:
On 13/02/2014 13:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 13/02/14 12:47, Adrian wrote:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 12:00:18 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Except the PP's proposal *would* work (bar any sillyness blocking
outgoing TCP/25 by the ISP).

Yes, it'll work if the ISP permits outgoing port 25, but no self-
respecting ISP would allow that.

All of them do. Allow that.

No, quite a few do/did block 25 outgoing.

bit hard to use their mail relay then.


The point being they allow it *only* to their mail relay.

But not from?


You don't need to receive anything from the mail relay, generally (as it
will be a dedicated SMTP relay, hosting no mailboxes), but even if you
did, you'd generally use POP or IMAP. Even if you had a SMTP server at
home, it would listen on 25, not try to send out.

On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:28:14 +0000, Huge wrote:

I'll be on their website ordering a VDSL upgrade in a couple of months
hopefully - the BT Openreach guy is outside my house wiring the new
FTTC cabinet

B@st@rd. )

Given where we live, we will *never* get FTTC.

Bet you're before us.

On 13/02/2014 14:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 13/02/14 13:36, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artÃ*culo , The Natural Philosopher
escribió:

bit hard to use their mail relay then.

port 25 from the ISP to the internet, dimwit.



well block that and they can't send any relayed mail at all can they?

;-)

I think that is kind of the point... i.e. the ISP wants all sent mail to
be via their SMTP relay.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 13/02/2014 13:36, Tim Watts wrote:
On Thursday 13 February 2014 13:12 Huge wrote in uk.d-i-y:


I suspect that AA's customers are not run-of-the-mill Wintendo
drivers.

That's the other reason I like AA - my IP range is not mixed up in a
netblock full of retards...

and then you blow it by coming here and hanging out with us lot ;-)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Friday 14 February 2014 01:57 John Rumm wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On 13/02/2014 13:36, Tim Watts wrote:
On Thursday 13 February 2014 13:12 Huge wrote in uk.d-i-y:


I suspect that AA's customers are not run-of-the-mill Wintendo
drivers.

That's the other reason I like AA - my IP range is not mixed up in a
netblock full of retards...

and then you blow it by coming here and hanging out with us lot ;-)



Ah - you're *supposed* to say:

"But YOU(me) are an AA customer!" ;-


--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal
coverage

Tim Watts wrote:
On Friday 14 February 2014 01:57 John Rumm wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On 13/02/2014 13:36, Tim Watts wrote:
On Thursday 13 February 2014 13:12 Huge wrote in uk.d-i-y:


I suspect that AA's customers are not run-of-the-mill Wintendo
drivers.

That's the other reason I like AA - my IP range is not mixed up in a
netblock full of retards...

and then you blow it by coming here and hanging out with us lot ;-)



Ah - you're *supposed* to say:

"But YOU(me) are an AA customer!" ;-


Alcoholics Anonymous?

On Friday 14 February 2014 11:05 Capitol wrote in uk.d-i-y:

Tim Watts wrote:
On Friday 14 February 2014 01:57 John Rumm wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On 13/02/2014 13:36, Tim Watts wrote:
On Thursday 13 February 2014 13:12 Huge wrote in uk.d-i-y:


I suspect that AA's customers are not run-of-the-mill Wintendo
drivers.

That's the other reason I like AA - my IP range is not mixed up in
a netblock full of retards...

and then you blow it by coming here and hanging out with us lot ;-)



Ah - you're *supposed* to say:

"But YOU(me) are an AA customer!" ;-


Alcoholics Anonymous?

Well, that too. Or is it Arseys Anonymous

I've certainly been on everyone arse recently in a fairly arsey way -
massive potholes of doom broke two springs on my car last month, EE
(plus Orange, TMobile and Three) have had no service in my village for a
week now due to broen cell tower and quite a lot of other general
moronicity from random people.

And have you seen what happened to our railway line at Stonegate:

http://i61.tinypic.com/son8g8.jpg


--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal
coverage

On Friday 14 February 2014 11:53 Huge wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On 2014-02-14, Tim Watts wrote:

And have you seen what happened to our railway line at Stonegate:

http://i61.tinypic.com/son8g8.jpg

Ouch. That's going to spill your coffee, isn't it?



I think it might!

That's the 4th or 5th landslip we've had - the others merely buried the
line under mud and were fairly quickly cleared up (though they need to
do 2-3 months of work to stabilise the cuttings).

The next line over at Uckfield is knackered due to a landslip at Oxted.

But we still have leccy and phone/adsl - so no need to actually go into
work to work.

--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal
coverage

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
Then came PCs. Well tat was OK
M$ tat was never OK and never will be.
--
bert

On 12/02/2014 10:56, Davidm wrote:
Not strictly DIY but I know there are some knowledgeable people on
here that might be able to explain this in plain English so....

I've been trying to explain to the Mrs why emails that she sends or
receives sometimes seem to get delayed by hours, or even days. I've
always just accepted this, but in trying to explain why to her realise
that I don't really understand it.

Taking an example, she sends an email via a client (Thunderbird) on
her PC (in the UK), which uses POP/SMTP to connect to her email
provider Virginmedia, to a recipient in the UK who uses a client also
using POP/SMTP to connect to Hotmail. Her client is setup to send
emails immediately, the recipient has their client checking for new
emails every 30 mins.

What is the path that the email might take through the "internet
cloud" to the point that it arrives at the recipients PC, and what
might happen to cause delays in the email being received?



email is not an assured delivery mechanism .... although many people
think it is.

So many servers handing off files to each other, anyone of them can fail
or be backlogged.

--
UK SelfBuild: http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/UK_Selfbuild/

On Thursday, 13 February 2014 14:27:16 UTC, Chris Bartram wrote:

No, quite a few do/did block 25 outgoing.

bit hard to use their mail relay then.

The point being they allow it *only* to their mail relay.

Or they make you use the mail submission port 587 instead which, given it is always deployed requiring authentication, cannot be used to send direct-to-MX spam.

On 14/02/2014 19:50, Mathew Newton wrote:
On Thursday, 13 February 2014 14:27:16 UTC, Chris Bartram wrote:

No, quite a few do/did block 25 outgoing.

bit hard to use their mail relay then.

The point being they allow it *only* to their mail relay.

Or they make you use the mail submission port 587 instead which, given it is always deployed requiring authentication, cannot be used to send direct-to-MX spam.

Indeed, increasingly common.

Mike Tomlinson posted
En el artículo , Davidm
escribió:

What is the path that the email might take through the "internet
cloud" to the point that it arrives at the recipients PC, and what
might happen to cause delays in the email being received?

Open up an email you have received, and find out how to display the full
headers. On some clients, it'll be "Message Properties", on others
"View Source"; the terminology varies. On Thunderbird, it's View -
Message Source, on Turnpike, press control-H.

When you have the full headers, which can initially look quite
intimidating, read them from the bottom up, starting at the first line
that starts with "Received:" and working upwards. That shows you the
path the message has taken to reach its destination. Each hop of the
transfer adds its own "Received:" line. By looking at the times at the
end of each Received line, you can work out where the delay(s) are.


Literally *every* time I have discovered that my outgoing emails are
being delayed or lost, the cause has turned out to be spam filtering
either by my own ISP or by the recipient's.

In the most recent case, outgoing emails from my gmail account were
being delayed by several hours or not delivered at all. I diagnosed the
problem by sending an email from the gmail account to another of my
accounts, and reading the header when it eventually arrived. It clearly
showed that my ISP (currently BT) was holding up the outgoing email in a
spam filter.

I would like to have copied this information to the BT support people,
but couldn't, because they do not allow you to communicate with them by
email

--
Les