<HTML>
<div>I was always under the impression anyways that ISPs like Comcast did
not allow any servers to be run period. <br> </div><div> </div><div>
Ironically I started using my own e-mail server way back when
Mediaone/RoadRunner/AT&T/Comcast kept changing ownership so often I
could not rely on having an e-mail address remain current for more than a
year. I did get contacted at one point from I believe AT&T asking me if
I was running a server, and if so to inform me I was breaking the TOS. Never
responded back, and they were soon sold to Comcast or whoever after. In my
opinion, if they did not keep changing the *#&@ domain name for e-mail
so often, I am sure a few would not bother to run their own e-mail.<br>
</div><div> </div><div>I think the lesson of the story is services like
Comcast are just not reliable for anything. I know Comcast is one company
that reportedly will monitor bandwidth, and if yours is excessive they will
contact you on this, which kind of defeats the purpose of broadband in my
opinion. Especially with the cities doing their own wireless shortly.<br>
</div><div> </div><p style="font-size: 10pt;"> </div><div>
</div><blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0);
padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Jon Schewe <jpschewe@mtu.net><br>
To: "John T. Hoffoss" <john.t.hoffoss@gmail.com><br>
Cc: "tclug-list@mn-linux.org" <tclug-list@mn-linux.org><br>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 12:06:39 -0500<br>
Subject: Re: [tclug-list] Comcast blocking port25<br>
<br>
</div><div style="font-family: monospace,courier new,courier;">
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 11:48 -0500, John T. Hoffoss wrote:<br>
> On 4/3/07, Brian D. Ropers-Huilman <brian@ropers-huilman.net>
wrote:<br>
> > On 4/3/07, Jon Schewe <jpschewe@mtu.net> wrote:<br>
> > > Has anyone else run across this? As of today I'm no
longer able to send<br>
> > > mail through my mailserver (mtu.net) port 25 as comcast is
blocking all<br>
> > > outgoing connections on port 25 for "my protection".<br>
> ><br>
> > This is a fairly common practice to prevent you from using mail<br>
> > servers that are not their own. One easy solution is to setup your
MTA<br>
> > to listen on another port (I've used 2525) or to send via SSL/TLS
as<br>
> > they never think to block 465.<br>
> <br>
> Well, he said outgoing. The "proper" way to do this is to configure<br>
> your MTA to relay your mail to your comcast SMTP server, and<br>
> everything will work just great. You can still use SSL/TLS, but that<br>
> only fixes stuff for incoming. And IIRC, Comcast shouldn't block<br>
> 25/tcp into your server, so it should not interfere with receiving
(or<br>
> sending from outside your LAN).<br>
<br>
I think that's what got me into trouble in the first place as comcast<br>
was seeing a lot of mail traffic going through their server because I'm<br>
the backup MX for mtu.net. They are blocking all traffic both to
and<br>
from port 25 on my machine.<br>
<br>
<br>
________________________________________________________________________<br>
<br>
Jon Schewe | <a href="http://mtu.net/%7Ejpschewe" target="_blank">
http://mtu.net/~jpschewe</a><br>
Help Jen and I fight cancer by donating to the Leukemia & Lymphomia<br>
Society<br>
Here's our website: <a
href="http://www.active.com/donate/tntmn/tntmnJSchewe" target="_blank">
http://www.active.com/donate/tntmn/tntmnJSchewe</a><br>
If you see an attachment named signature.asc, this is my digital<br>
signature.<br>
See <a href="http://www.gnupg.org" target="_blank">http://www.gnupg.org</a>
for more information.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</HTML>