Has comcast ever responded to a ping on this list?
Has anyone ever managed to open a dialogue with symantec (or comcast) about that fscked up proprietary RBL they are using?
We're on the verge of just giving up on comcast and telling our customers to forward their email someplace else (a lot of them are doing that anyway)
-mark
Mark Jeftovic wrote:
Has anyone ever managed to open a dialogue with symantec (or comcast) about that fscked up proprietary RBL they are using?
We're on the verge of just giving up on comcast
I know Sender Verification Callback has its issues, but maybe it
would make sense to only accept email from Comcast after verifying
that they accept email from you?
Might be more effective than diplomacy in this case 
> Has anyone ever managed to open a dialogue with symantec
(or comcast)
> about that fscked up proprietary RBL they are using?
>
> We're on the verge of just giving up on comcastI know Sender Verification Callback has its issues, but maybe it
would make sense to only accept email from Comcast after verifying
that they accept email from you?Might be more effective than diplomacy in this case
I've taken the rather extreme approach of bouncing everything through
Gmail first. Let's see them block Google. 
Tony
Patient: Doctor, Doctor, It hurts when I do this.
Doctor: Don't do that.
There are lots of Mail Service Providers. AOL, Comcast, Gmail, Yahoo, Outblaze, whoever, each have their own quirks and problems. All have blocked various sources including each other at one time or another.
Some people complain about some of the decisions made by each of them; while other people applaud the same decisions.
Perhaps people are using the wrong tools to solve the problems?
Trying to forward from one account to another through spam filters is probably not a good idea, especially since the primary filtering mechanism used by most anti-spam technologies is based on the connecting host. You
generally can't "trust" the originating IP address information of other
hops, if they are even present. For example, Gmail doesn't include the
originating IP address in its email which makes it even more difficult for spam filters to judge its reputation. If a system forwards unfiltered e-mail in today's Internet, it is forwarding spam, viruses, and other malicious stuff, and will likely continue to trip defensive controls on
systems.
Different tools such as fetchmail, multi-mailbox POP/IMAP clients, etc
may be more appropriate in today's Internet. Bulk forwarding of unfiltered e-mail is probably not a good idea. If systems are going to
forward e-mail, it may be a good idea to use spam filters BEFORE forwarding the messages and use a distinct forwarding IP connections for
those messages so the receiver can treat those messages as pre-filtered
and direct complaints about those messages to the forwarder for handling.
There are several other mailing lists covering the topics of e-mail,
e-mail forwarding, spam technologies, etc.
You misspelled "makes it a veritable haven for 419 scammers".
I never understood why Gmail didn’t put an X-Originating-From header in mail sent out by web users.
-brandon
Seconded! It may not be a requirement but the omission is certainly inconsistent with most web-based email services, particularly a popular one like Gmail. A lot of abuse ends at a dead-end because trying to deal with security/abuse @ gmail is a losing cause.
-david
Thus spake "Sean Donelan" <sean@donelan.com>
I've taken the rather extreme approach of bouncing everything through
Gmail first. Let's see them block Google.Patient: Doctor, Doctor, It hurts when I do this.
Doctor: Don't do that.
Not very helpful advice when Comcast's mail servers block about 75% (but oddly not 100%) of mail _to or from_ specific domains, and the reason stated for rejection is obviously false after only a couple seconds of investigation.
Telling half my family members they have to go get Gmail so they can email the other half of my family members is ridiculous. Too bad Comcast has a monopoly (or, where a duopoly, the competition is just as incompetent) so they have no incentive to fix it.
There are lots of Mail Service Providers. AOL, Comcast, Gmail, Yahoo, Outblaze, whoever, each have their own quirks and problems. All have blocked various sources including each other at one time or another.
Some people complain about some of the decisions made by each of
them; while other people applaud the same decisions.
Very few people ever applaud a provider blocking legitimate mail.
Perhaps people are using the wrong tools to solve the problems?
Because Comcast's tools are broken and when other mail admins or even their own customers call them on it, they're not even competent enough to understand the complaint and refuse to escalate?
S
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
I hate to say this, and get involved in the melee, but... Perhaps the
problem is that for an average customer service employee there are 1000
calls about something meaningless and not-wrong and only 1 call about
something truly wrong? So escalating every problem that seems even half
baked isn't an option?
Perhaps some of the comcast folks reading might take a better/harder look
at their customer service tickets and do a 'better' job (note I'm not even
half of a comcast customer so I'm not sure that there even IS a
problem...) on this issue?
In general blaming the first level tech for something isn't going to get
anyone anywhere near a solution. Perhaps Sean's actually saying: "The
right tool is to use another provider?" even though Steven's thought is
that the 'other provider' is in the same boat of clue 
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Because Comcast's tools are broken and when other mail admins or even
their own customers call them on it, they're not even competent enough
to understand the complaint and refuse to escalate?
It doesn't matter even if you are escalated. One of our (and their)
customers finally screamed loud enough to be escalated to a Comcast Sr
Tech (who even had his own phone number, no less!) and his response on
the phone was the same position as the first levels: "nothing we can do
about it". It should be noted that the fellow was nice enough to at
least talk to me, even though I have no relationship with Comcast other
then having my servers blacklisted by them.
You can try:
http://www.comcastsupport.com/sdcxuser/lachat/user/Blockedprovider.asp
or if that doesn't work:
Call 856-317-7272, listen for 00:02:17 , press 1 (within a 3 second
window)m listen for 1 minute and leave a message that might be returned
within 3 days (according to the message).
Perhaps some of the comcast folks reading might take a better/harder look
at their customer service tickets and do a 'better' job (note I'm not even
half of a comcast customer so I'm not sure that there even IS a
problem...) on this issue?
I am a Comcast customer. I'm typing this message over a Comcast line, although you won't find anything in this message header which shows that.
No X-Originating-IP, no received line, nothing "mandatory" showing where
I am today.
Most ISPs support customer applications because they believe the more services customers use from the provider, the less likely customers will switch providers, not because its "mandatory" to have those applications.
But there is no requirement to use your ISP's mail server or any other
application from your ISP. Likewise there is no requirement for a ISP to offer any E-mail or Usenet, or FTP, or legal music downloads, or any other application to its customers. There isn't even a requirement for it to have any customer service. Few of the large free Email providers have any easy way to talk to any human about mail problems. So you don't even get the satisfaction of yelling at a first level tech about your frustrations.
In general blaming the first level tech for something isn't going to get
anyone anywhere near a solution. Perhaps Sean's actually saying: "The
right tool is to use another provider?" even though Steven's thought is
that the 'other provider' is in the same boat of clue
Mail Service Providers have a wide variety of policies, service levels, delivery performance, etc. Searching Google for "free mail provider" returns over 500 hits. Yahoo directory lists over 100 free mail providers. There is hardly a "monopoly" or "duopoly" of mail service providers, although the big four or five mail providers sometimes try
to throw their weight around. Yeah, I know he was joking but what
would a "E-Mail Neutrality Law" do to mail providers?
I happen to think the problem is with the bulk mail forwarding services that don't pre-filter mail. But that's just my opinion. I choose not
to use unfiltered bulk mail forwarding services so I don't have those
problems.
Thus spake "Sean Donelan" <sean@donelan.com>
But there is no requirement to use your ISP's mail server or any other
application from your ISP. Likewise there is no requirement for a ISP to offer any E-mail or Usenet, or FTP, or legal music downloads, or any
other application to its customers. There isn't even a requirement for it
to have any customer service. Few of the large free Email providers
have any easy way to talk to any human about mail problems. So you
don't even get the satisfaction of yelling at a first level tech about your
frustrations.
However, the reality is that a significant fraction of users will use their ISP's email service, if one is provided. They'll tolerate minor failures because changing your email address and distributing it to everyone is such a hassle. More and more folks are wising up to this and switching to Yahoo mail or Gmail so they don't have to do it ever again, but OTOH those services are better-run than most ISP mail systems.
I happen to think the problem is with the bulk mail forwarding services that don't pre-filter mail. But that's just my opinion. I choose not
to use unfiltered bulk mail forwarding services so I don't have those
problems.
That's not the problem, because I'm not using a bulk mail forwarding service. It's just a single vanity domain hosted by a single Linux box with a half-dozen accounts. And I read the mail _on that box_. There is nothing complicated going on here; we're talking stuff people were doing just fine in the 1980s. I can get email from and send email to anyone on the planet reliably except Comcast customers, which, unfortunately, includes several family members and friends. And even that worked for years; it just broke a few months ago.
The real killer is it's broken in both directions; I can't come up with any legitimate reason for that. Inbound (to comcast), I could blame on spam filters, but not outbound.
S
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
Agreed.
While working at a small ISP many years ago I used to make it a point to take a few first level support calls a week -- it gives you a new appreciation for the tech support people and helps you understand what really bothers your customers. I also used to get some of the other NEs to take a few calls a week -- understanding the pain it caused (and making customers into real people) cut down on the more intrusive "testing"[1].
It can also provide you with much entertainment -- for example, I used to get calls asking things like "Can I get the Internet in my house?". A few times I asked "Depends, how big is your house?", but no one ever got it... Or the little old lady who would call up every few days and say " Dearie, the internet is broken again, can you please reboot it?"...
Warren
[1] Where testing means "Eh, lets just reload it and see if the problem goes away"...
Christopher L. Morrow wroteth on 9/6/2006 5:11 PM:
Because Comcast's tools are broken and when other mail admins or even
their own customers call them on it, they're not even competent enough
to understand the complaint and refuse to escalate?I hate to say this, and get involved in the melee, but... Perhaps the
problem is that for an average customer service employee there are 1000
calls about something meaningless and not-wrong and only 1 call about
something truly wrong? So escalating every problem that seems even half
baked isn't an option?
You're probably right. However, if someone called my place of employment (a small local ISP) and complained followed by quite a few others, I would at least escalate the issue so someone higher than me can check out logs, connectivity, etc.. things I don't have access too to make sure there isn't a problem.
What is unfortunate is the fact that this generally doesn't happen. You get lots of calls and Tier I does the obvious and it works and works on those others that call that the issue must be them and it's case closed and nothing gets escalated. It's even worse of the problem gets seemingly solved and the customer doesn't call back for quite a while.. gives the appearance all is well even though it truly is not.
Perhaps some of the comcast folks reading might take a better/harder look
at their customer service tickets and do a 'better' job (note I'm not even
half of a comcast customer so I'm not sure that there even IS a
problem...) on this issue?
Most ISP's could do a better job. The last ISP I worked at utilized RT for their support. I think a strong ticketing system and using that ticketing system to it's full potential would go a long way in getting things solved faster as well as being able to see trends that could then get escalated without lots of pissed off people having to call and bitch whine and moan before escalation happens. You could easily see an issue with a properly setup ticketing system such as RT.
In general blaming the first level tech for something isn't going to get
anyone anywhere near a solution. Perhaps Sean's actually saying: "The
right tool is to use another provider?" even though Steven's thought is
that the 'other provider' is in the same boat of clue
... good point. It may not even be the techs fault on any tier level. It might be company policy, unfortunately.
Christopher L. Morrow wroteth on 9/6/2006 5:11 PM:
> something truly wrong? So escalating every problem that seems even half
> baked isn't an option?You're probably right. However, if someone called my place of
employment (a small local ISP) and complained followed by quite a few
others, I would at least escalate the issue so someone higher than me
can check out logs, connectivity, etc.. things I don't have access too
to make sure there isn't a problem.What is unfortunate is the fact that this generally doesn't happen. You
get lots of calls and Tier I does the obvious and it works and works on
I think you are doing 2 things here:
1) assuming that there is a local and flat (all in one place and within
earshot) tier1
2) someone is correlating issues across all tier1 tickets in 'real time'
(or near realtime even)
those others that call that the issue must be them and it's case closed
and nothing gets escalated. It's even worse of the problem gets
seemingly solved and the customer doesn't call back for quite a while..
gives the appearance all is well even though it truly is not.
Ask a credit card company about the number of sub 10$ fraudulent charges
they get on a monthly basis across their customer base, they do nothing to
stop it... in fact they don't track it (in most cases) because it's not
federally reportable 
Unless someone has a ticketing system that tracks problems and allows you
to correlate the events in near-realtime for 'problem caused by' there is
no want to know when there is a mass problem Or atleast it's much
harder to do that correlation
>
> Perhaps some of the comcast folks reading might take a better/harder look
> at their customer service tickets and do a 'better' job (note I'm not even
> half of a comcast customer so I'm not sure that there even IS a
> problem...) on this issue?Most ISP's could do a better job. The last ISP I worked at utilized RT
for their support. I think a strong ticketing system and using that
ticketing system to it's full potential would go a long way in getting
yes, agree, see above.
things solved faster as well as being able to see trends that could then
get escalated without lots of pissed off people having to call and bitch
whine and moan before escalation happens. You could easily see an issue
with a properly setup ticketing system such as RT.
.. and someone actually monitoring that ticketting system don't forget
the 'monitor the system part' because I would guarantee that comcast has
some form of ticketting system (just using them since they are in the
example/email here...)
>
> In general blaming the first level tech for something isn't going to get
> anyone anywhere near a solution. Perhaps Sean's actually saying: "The
> right tool is to use another provider?" even though Steven's thought is
> that the 'other provider' is in the same boat of clue... good point. It may not even be the techs fault on any tier level.
It might be company policy, unfortunately.
yes try getting support for mci phone service apparently they stopped
providing it a while ago
I'm tired of this duopoly fiction. Cable modem providers are usually
de facto monopolies,
though some of them may use PPPoE or other methods of supporting
wholesale service,
but DSL is only a monopoly at the copper layer, not at the DSLAM layer
in more than half of the US or at the IP layer in almost all of the
US.
Beyond that, there are a number of service providers that will accept
VPN tunnels
of various sorts so you can get service access independent of your
ISP's policies.
That doesn't mean, of course, that it isn't too much hassle for your
relatives to want to do that just to avoid the limitations of Comcast,
but they've got lots of options if they want them.