rr.com blocking our netblock since this morning now....
5.7.1 Mail Refused - 216.220.40 - See
http://security.rr.com/mail_blocks.htm#security
Anyone else?
We got hit with same last night. Still trying to determine cause. This
page does little to tell us the reason.
-Alan
Mark Jeftovic writes on 10/10/2003 7:33 PM:
rr.com blocking our netblock since this morning now....
5.7.1 Mail Refused - 216.220.40 - See
http://security.rr.com/mail_blocks.htm#security
Mail them at spamblock@security.rr.com - RR has good people reading it.
RR has been using a lot of blocks for quite some time. Fortunately, they
were very responsive when I mailed their abuse address as indicated on that
URL. I gave them the allocation I was responsible for, asked for that
subset of addresses to be unblocked, and things were fine within the day.
Was simple, if somewhat annoying.
Since the topic is mysterious rejections from MTAs, I have one from
UUNet. One of our business partners has UUNet for an ISP and is using
UUNet for a tertiary MTA. Occasionally, mail ends up going to that MTA
(quite often actually, their primary gets unresponsive from time to time
and I've _never_ actually been able to reach the secondary) and gets
bounced at the "MAIL FROM:",
$ telnet relay.eu.mail.uu.net 25
Trying 199.171.54.122...
telnet: connect to address 199.171.54.122: Connection refused
Trying 199.171.54.202...
telnet: connect to address 199.171.54.202: Operation timed out
Trying 199.171.54.203...
telnet: connect to address 199.171.54.203: Operation timed out
Trying 199.171.54.245...
Connected to relay.eu.mail.uu.net.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net ESMTP Please see http://www.worldcom.com/global/terms/a_u_p/ for Acceptable Use Policy
HELO gibraltar.globalstar.com
250 mr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net Hello gibraltar.globalstar.com [207.88.248.142], pleased to meet you
MAIL FROM:<cclark@globalstar.com>
550 no
QUIT
221 mr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net closing connection
Connection closed by foreign host.
Quite a helpful error message there, "550 no." (That's not even to mention
the addresses that time out or aren't listening on 25/tcp. I see seven A
records for that domain name.)
Has anyone out there an idea of why UUNet does not like our domain? I would
_guess_ the problem might be some weird spam filter, but AFAIK, our domain
and IP space is damn clean WRT spam. The AUP link is not any help.
Actually we just got blocked this morning by RR. Is something going on
there today?
Gerald
It seems RoadRunner is no longer deferring us or refusing our
connections... they're BOUNCING everything.
Nice.
Oct 10 16:04:28 10.0.2.42 postfix/smtp[11683]: 778A77050E:
to=<________@cfl.rr.com>, relay=flmx04.mgw.rr.com[65.32.1.50], delay=5,
status=bounced (host flmx04.mgw.rr.com[65.32.1.50] said: 550 5.7.1 Mail
Refused - 216.220.40 - See http://security.rr.com/mail_blocks.htm#security
- 20031009)
Oct 10 16:04:32 10.0.2.43 postfix/smtp[17668]: 5413470CC9:
to=<_________@houston.rr.com>, relay=txmx02.mgw.rr.com[24.93.35.209],
delay=373, status=bounced (host txmx02.mgw.rr.com[24.93.35.209] said: 550
5.7.1 Mail Refused - 216.220.40 - See
http://security.rr.com/mail_blocks.htm#security - 20031009)
Oct 10 16:04:43 10.0.2.43 postfix/smtp[16008]: F3B5270BD5:
to=<_________@carolina.rr.com>, relay=ncmx02.mgw.rr.com[24.25.4.96],
delay=437, status=bounced (host ncmx02.mgw.rr.com[24.25.4.96] said: 550
5.7.1 Mail Refused - 216.220.40 - See
http://security.rr.com/mail_blocks.htm#security - 20031009)
Mail spamblock@security.rr.com - they are whitehat, and you'll know the people there from spam-l.
Oh, they respond quite fast.
suresh
Mark Jeftovic writes on 10/11/2003 1:54 AM:
Mark Jeftovic said:
It seems RoadRunner is no longer deferring us or refusing our
connections... they're BOUNCING everything.
That's what they did to us. No deferrals, just started 571'ing
everything. I sent a query to the spamblock mail address, received
autoreply and nothing else. We finally called them and they claim the
block will be removed today.
Nice.
Yeah, but which part? The part where:
1) They didn't respond to the email (yes, sent from unblocked network);
2) They began the blocking without notification or better documentation;
3) They were unable to tell us why they blocked us in the first place.
What number did you call to talk to them?
It looks like they're taking our mail again now....