Please contact me offlist at tv@pobox.com, or via the telephone number in my
duh.org contacts. The support IVR and agents are ... less than helpful.
(Your new SMTP port filters put in today in the Atlanta market are a step in
the right direction, but they are configured incorrectly: They block
outbound connections to port 25, which is good -- but they are also blocking
*inbound* connections to a local SMTP receiver, which protects nothing and
simply annoys those of us who have a clue.)
What they're *trying* to do is actually quite sensible, and beats
spammers trying to do asymmetric routing / source address spoofing
type stuff
I guess what they actually should do is filtering inbound connections
FROM port 25 to any port.
Thread starting from
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2005-01/msg00127.html for
example
And an example of how people get bitten without doing that ..
What Hank thought: http://www.cctec.com/maillists/nanog/current/msg03171.html
Actual issue: http://www.cctec.com/maillists/nanog/current/msg03232.html
(which is what it turned out to be .. unidirectional port 25 filtering
and a customer - nigerian spammer rather - who was sending out packets
through a satellite interface but with Hank's IP as the source IP)
srs
That's why I said that it is misconfigured. The inbound packet filter has
the wrong matching criterion.