Again, I *HATE* dnsorbs.... This was bounced, which makes twice today. <snip> more text, add a few more words, we'll see if this makes it.
John R Pierce wrote:
On 01/09/12 12:05 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
John R Pierce wrote:
On 01/09/12 11:11 AM,m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
They are? I dunno - ours are labelled where they're intended to
be mounted, like / or /boot
don't plug one of those into a different system for repair or
you'll have all kinda grief. $HOSTNAME_root would be the sane way to do
it...
I'm trying to figure out why I'd plug one into a different system for
repair. Either the drive's bad, or I'm re-embodying a server that died, but left good drives. If it's going bad, the*only* thing I'm going to do is plug it into a hot-swap bay (just about all of ours have those, love them) to recover some data, then wipe it.
exactly. and if you put that drive in a hotswap bay of another system that is using the same label, thats a potential for a big mess. same
<snip> Why? If I shove it into another system, I'm *not* rebooting using it, just putting it into a spare bay; then I'll mount /dev/sd<whatever> /mnt.
No problem.
But this thread's gotten way OT: *does* anyone have any idea what the .img file is that the running o/s from install.img is looking for, after the partitioning, when it's ready to install?
mark
On 01/09/12 12:31 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Again, I*HATE* dnsorbs.... This was bounced, which makes twice today. <snip> more text, add a few more words, we'll see if this makes it.
your email is being relayed through 66.147.249.253 (oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com) which appears on several spam lists, for instance, sorbs says 100s of spams have been sent from that host in the past interval.
you want to use a spammer-friendly service as your mail server, expect to be treated as a spammer and blocked by admins tired of the deluge..
John R Pierce wrote:
On 01/09/12 12:31 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Again, I*HATE* dnsorbs.... This was bounced, which makes twice today. <snip> more text, add a few more words, we'll see if this makes it.
your email is being relayed through 66.147.249.253 (oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com) which appears on several spam lists, for instance, sorbs says 100s of spams have been sent from that host in the past interval.
you want to use a spammer-friendly service as your mail server, expect to be treated as a spammer and blocked by admins tired of the deluge..
Let's go through this again - we did it months ago. My site is hosted by hostmonster, which also operates as bluehost. They are a *large* provider, with hundreds of thousands of domains, and the email from all of them go through their (few) email servers. Therefore, when 100 or so of them running WinBlows get their hosts infected, and they send out spam, and the hosting provider hasn't caught them yet, hundreds of thousands of the rest of us get hit with the same block.
Who here is *not* using a work email? Who here posts from their own hosting site? Has this ever happened to you?
mark
On 01/09/12 1:13 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Let's go through this again - we did it months ago. My site is hosted by hostmonster, which also operates as bluehost. They are a*large* provider, with hundreds of thousands of domains, and the email from all of them go through their (few) email servers. Therefore, when 100 or so of them running WinBlows get their hosts infected, and they send out spam, and the hosting provider hasn't caught them yet, hundreds of thousands of the rest of us get hit with the same block.
Thats a BS excuse. gmail has MILLIONS more users than bluehost, yet doesn't seem to ever be used to relay spam. Why? they are proactive rather than reactive. Bluehost is a cutrate provider who only reacts when forced, or this wouldn't keep recurring over and over again.
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:29:24PM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
Thats a BS excuse. gmail has MILLIONS more users than bluehost, yet doesn't seem to ever be used to relay spam. Why? they are proactive
*giggle* *giggle* *laugh* *guffaw* BWAAHAHAHAHHH!
No spam via gmail? Wow... Funniest thing I've heard all day!
Stephen Harris wrote:
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:29:24PM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
Thats a BS excuse. gmail has MILLIONS more users than bluehost, yet doesn't seem to ever be used to relay spam. Why? they are proactive
*giggle* *giggle* *laugh* *guffaw* BWAAHAHAHAHHH!
No spam via gmail? Wow... Funniest thing I've heard all day!
And then there's google+. I'm *REALLY* tired of Poredsky (or however his name's spelled), sending me spam in Russian....
mark
On 2012-01-10 08:44, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote: ...<snip>...
And then there's google+. I'm *REALLY* tired of Poredsky (or however his name's spelled), sending me spam in Russian....
I hear you. I recently created an SPF record and added the necessary SMF-SPF milter on my mail server just to fight this Sergey Podushkin SPAM; all history now! This guy was getting on my last nerve!
Cheers, ak.
On 01/09/12 1:39 PM, Stephen Harris wrote:
*giggle* *giggle* *laugh* *guffaw* BWAAHAHAHAHHH!
No spam via gmail? Wow... Funniest thing I've heard all day!
none of it that I've seen came through gmail servers... lots of spam from anonymous open relays with forged @gmail.com from addresses, they can't do anything about that.
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:44:54PM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
On 01/09/12 1:39 PM, Stephen Harris wrote:
*giggle* *giggle* *laugh* *guffaw* BWAAHAHAHAHHH!
No spam via gmail? Wow... Funniest thing I've heard all day!
none of it that I've seen came through gmail servers... lots of spam from anonymous open relays with forged @gmail.com from addresses, they can't do anything about that.
What you have seen, maybe. What I've seen? Hahahah.
Now, to be fair, Google _have_ improved. It's nowhere as bad as it was 2 years ago (when various services actually blacklisted google as a spam source). But to say that google never relays spam is laughable.
John R Pierce wrote:
On 01/09/12 1:13 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Let's go through this again - we did it months ago. My site is hosted by hostmonster, which also operates as bluehost. They are a*large* provider, with hundreds of thousands of domains, and the email from all of them go through their (few) email servers. Therefore, when 100 or so of them running WinBlows get their hosts infected, and they send out spam, and the hosting provider hasn't caught them yet, hundreds of thousands of the rest of us get hit with the same block.
Thats a BS excuse. gmail has MILLIONS more users than bluehost, yet doesn't seem to ever be used to relay spam. Why? they are proactive rather than reactive. Bluehost is a cutrate provider who only reacts when forced, or this wouldn't keep recurring over and over again.
Ok, fine. Find me a hosting provider with similar rates - I don't have a commercial site - and then get my money refunded that I've prepaid, and the move of my stuff.
And I resent you suggesting that I chose them without doing due dilligence, without getting a recommendations for hosting providers from friends, some of whom have been online a *very* long time.
I should jump every time a provider falls behind? And no, I will NOT go to gmail - when I use pop-3 and delete, I want it *GONE* forever off the server.
mark
On 01/09/2012 10:13 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
John R Pierce wrote:
On 01/09/12 12:31 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Again, I*HATE* dnsorbs.... This was bounced, which makes twice today. <snip> more text, add a few more words, we'll see if this makes it.
your email is being relayed through 66.147.249.253 (oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com) which appears on several spam lists, for instance, sorbs says 100s of spams have been sent from that host in the past interval.
you want to use a spammer-friendly service as your mail server, expect to be treated as a spammer and blocked by admins tired of the deluge..
Let's go through this again - we did it months ago. My site is hosted by hostmonster, which also operates as bluehost. They are a *large* provider, with hundreds of thousands of domains, and the email from all of them go through their (few) email servers. Therefore, when 100 or so of them running WinBlows get their hosts infected, and they send out spam, and the hosting provider hasn't caught them yet, hundreds of thousands of the rest of us get hit with the same block.
Who here is *not* using a work email? Who here posts from their own hosting site? Has this ever happened to you?
I own my own domain/server/subnet. My WISP customers can only send mail via my server, with all the prevention's I could think of. I have never been hit with this (but I do have small customer base), but I have had regular domains (like one local Bank!!!) blocked to deliver to my server because they do not have proper FQDN.
On 01/09/12 1:30 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
I own my own domain/server/subnet. My WISP customers can only send mail via my server, with all the prevention's I could think of. I have never been hit with this (but I do have small customer base), but I have had regular domains (like one local Bank!!!) blocked to deliver to my server because they do not have proper FQDN.
I too run a few mail servers... none of my servers will accept incoming email from a host that doesn't have a reverse DNS that when looked up returns the original IP (eg, IP -> reverse -> forward -> IP... note this doesn't have to match the HELO name). I also check that the 'from' domain name has an A or MX record. This sort of thing has been standard practice for email servers for at least 15 years. The way I figure it, if someone can't get the DNS right, they shouldn't be running a email server at all.
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
On 01/09/2012 10:13 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
<snip>
Who here is *not* using a work email? Who here posts from their own hosting site? Has this ever happened to you?
I own my own domain/server/subnet. My WISP customers can only send mail via my server, with all the prevention's I could think of. I have never been hit with this (but I do have small customer base), but I have had regular domains (like one local Bank!!!) blocked to deliver to my server because they do not have proper FQDN.
As I noted in another email, I don't have a commercial site. Buying a static IP from Verizon, to run a server from home, is a *lot* more expensive than just a 'Net connection and an inexpensive hosting provider.
mark
On 01/09/2012 10:43 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
On 01/09/2012 10:13 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
<snip> >> Who here is *not* using a work email? Who here posts from their own >> hosting site? Has this ever happened to you? > > I own my own domain/server/subnet. My WISP customers can only send mail > via my server, with all the prevention's I could think of. I have never > been hit with this (but I do have small customer base), but I have had > regular domains (like one local Bank!!!) blocked to deliver to my server > because they do not have proper FQDN.
As I noted in another email, I don't have a commercial site. Buying a static IP from Verizon, to run a server from home, is a *lot* more expensive than just a 'Net connection and an inexpensive hosting provider.
It is OK. You asked who, and I answered, that is all. If I was not on the semi-reliable 150Km Wireless link, I would be able to provide quality service.
Believe it or not, I am one of the *very* *very* rare hosting providers in Serbia (local mostly) that provide SSL POP3/SMTP connection via port 995 and 465. There is maybe one or two providers on 7 million citizens.
And yes, I forgot to write about reverse DNS, I have that too.
-
Anthony -
John R Pierce -
Ljubomir Ljubojevic -
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Stephen Harris