METROCAST BLOCKS RESIDENTIAL E-MAIL

[aluminumsulfate at earthlink.net]

   From: Neil Joseph Schelly <neil at jenandneil.com>
   Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 17:02:13 -0500

   > Metrocast is filtering ALL port 25 packets OUTBOUND from their
   > residential customers.

   While I understand your frustration, what they are doing is a
   pretty valid way to reduce spam.  If you're running your own mail
   server somewhere you want to

That's just it.  It's NOT a valid way to reduce spam.  Just like killing
junkies is not a valid way to fight AIDS...

   use, then you can run a mail server on an alternate port.  Lots
   don't block 465 (ssmtp) or 587 (alternate smtp).  In my case, since
   I can never remember

Clever.  I'll have to look into that.  And then tell all the spamsters. :)

   You could also configure your local machine to smarthost all email
   through your ISP's mail server.  The only problem here is with SPF.
   If you control

"The only problem" is that I have reason to believe my ISP isn't all
that "smart".

   it is recognized as a "valid" sender of email from your domain.  If
   you don't control the domain, perhaps your company can build a VPN
   setup.  There certainly would be no problem with using the VPN to
   access your mail server, bypassing your ISP's firewall.

I have been thinking about tunneling IPv6 over IPv4 to some POP on the
(unfirewalled) Internet.  I figure an IPv6 provider is unlikely to be
as braindead as Metroca$t.  Think this'll work?

   From: "Ben Scott" <dragonhawk at gmail.com>
   To: gnhlug-discuss at mail.gnhlug.org
   Subject: Re: METROCAST BLOCKS RESIDENTIAL E-MAIL
   Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 17:52:53 -0500

   On 3/7/06, Neil Joseph Schelly <neil at jenandneil.com> wrote:
   > This isn't something to get so bent out of shape for really.

     Sure it is.  Didn't you know that Internet access is a
   Constitutional Right?  ;-)

Well, Internet access isn't a constitutional right.  But privacy and
the right to cooperate are.  The Internet *is* a big cooperative.  And
not playing by the rules (not adhering to INET standards) hurts not
only local users, but the Network as a community.

The Internet stands on three legs:

 (1) Hardware,
 (2) Protocols, and
 (3) Cooperation

Without any one of these three, the Internet will crumble or, at the
very least, weaken.  Violation of protocols and refusing to cooperate
are what Metroca$t is doing.

   From: "Ben Scott" <dragonhawk at gmail.com>
   Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 18:04:11 -0500

     Like everything else in business, this boils down to return on
   investment.  ROI.

Yes, at the expense of integrity and social responsibility.

   From: Fred <puissante at lrc.puissante.com>
   Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 06:39:59 -0500

   Today, nearly everyone who wants Net access has it. Kinda like the
   TV. And if you don't have it at home, you can always get it at your
   local Library.  Those that don't have it are either technophobes or
   illiterate or simply don't see the value.

Not true.  Some of us are poor.

   If you are such a lazy bum as to be too pathetic to drag yourself
   out of bed and down to the Library, that does not count as a
   "restriction".

What public libraries provide usually does not qualify as "Internet
access" any more than webmail qualifies as "email".  Most libraries
will only permit you access to a web browser (IE, at that), forbid you
from using external media (like floppy disks, CD-ROMs, USB MSD), and
limit you to some stupid time limit like 60 minutes per day.  Not to
mention the fact that you can't get the full experience of Internet
porn in a public place.... ;) Library Internet is to Internet access
like Taco Bell is to Mexican food.  It just doesn't really qualify. :)