Contacting Network Admins Of Large Internet Companies?

I know someone who used to work at @home by Anonymous Coward · 2001-01-20 02:56 · Score: 1

Where I work, we hired a guy who previously worked at AT&T's @home tech support. He's really good at solving customer problems (we sell electronic sensors, not computers, software, internet service, etc). He walked in knowing virtually nothing about our products, but he read all the manuals in about a week and with suprisingly little hands-on help, he's able to use/install/troubleshoot almost every product we make. He seems to like the job... no timer running during the calls, and when it really looks like there's something wrong with the product or he's in over his head, he's free to walk over to engineering and get some of our time. He almost never does, and when he does, quite often it really is a problem with the product or an error in the install instructions.

Anyways, he sometimes tells some stories about working at @home's tech support. Nearly all the calls were simple windows-based issues. The one type of tech call, which apparantly was pretty common that's pretty funny is people calling, completely outraged that their ping time went from 25 ms to 80 ms lately and they're getting killed! Something would change somewhere in a router and he'd spend hours, call after call, answering these pissed off gamers, who were insistant that AT&T had broken their network and it needed to be fixed. There are numerous stories about dumb users, which reportedly are the lion's share of all the tech calls. I asked once if he ever got a call from a real expert about a real problem... the answer: no.

It can be frustrating calling places like @home with a real problem. It's well known that their tech support sucks. Based on what I've seen from this guy we hired (admittedly a sample of only one), it looks like @home's poor service is a function of their system and its rules (admittedly based on the large volume of unskilled end-user questions), and not a lack of talent in their staff.

I'm posting this anonymously, even though I have a regular slashdot account (karma capped at 50), cause it just doesn't feel right to speak for my employer so much, but I thought maybe some of you reading these comments might like to hear a positive story about one of their (former) tech support guys.

Re:I know someone who used to work at @home by TahitiNut · 2001-01-20 08:50 · Score: 1

From what I can tell, most of those with learning ability and integrity quickly leave the various Customer Support positions associated with @Home. The chances of reaching a Tier 1 CSR who can actually distinguish between a technically savvy customer and a helpless newbie are less than 1 in five. The larger cable operators (especially AT&T) who remarket @Home services are running their own Tier 1 CS operations, either internally or subcontracted to about three major body shops that run telephone boiler rooms. The IRS is better at "customer care" than the vast majority of these folks. Not only aren't these folks able to obtain any information about known network or server outages that may be causing calls, they're not even apparently aware of or concerned that they aren't. About 1 time in three, their own support systems are out, so they can't even log the call or access what little information that may be available. They usually aren't even able to access the service themselves, since they're on segregated WANs. On top of all this, they often lie and invent "policy" merely to close out the call ... where the customer has had to wait often more than an hour on hold just to get through. Newbie customers have had their systems hosed because they slavishly followed the CSRs misguided or malicious instructions, often up to and including reinstalling their OS and all software ... when the issues actually do lie in the malfunctioning services themselves. Among the things customers have been told ... no credits for prolonged and repeated email service failures because email is "free" ... the don't accept complaints about web server outages because user webspaces are "free" ... no credit or accommodation for news server outages because Usenet is "free" ... they can only get a credit for one day at a time, and must call every day (taking an hour or two) to get another day's credit ($1.33), even if they're completely dead in the water. In my 30 years in this industry, I have *never* heard of a support function that was so abysmal. They make AOL look like saints and rocket scientists. They make the CSRs in the old days of CompuServe look like gods. It's truly beyond belief. Yet ... every once in awhile (1 time in 5), a diligent and honest CSR actually takes the call. 1-3 months later, that CSR is no longer there and their email bounces.

As a former Mail Administrator... by Anonymous Coward · 2001-01-20 09:28 · Score: 1

You debug the problem and do 2 things.

First write it up (including bounced emails as examples) and send that to postmaster@

Secondly you use the domain registration or any information you can find to talk to their Mail Adminstrator. Call any number of theirs that will answer and be up front. Leave your direct number with anyone that will relay it. You are the email administrator for an ISP and you are having problems sending email to their customers. You need to speak with the email administrator or a member of their NOC. That's it. Be direct and don't bend. If you hit a wall take a name, and re-route. Evenutally you will get through.

As time goes on you turn up the heat. If your customer has alternate contacts for the @home customers, tell them the honest truth. You have debugged the problem and are attempting to get resolution but the provider on the other end is not being responsive and you are hitting a wall. Keep trying but place the blame solidly, you are responsive, they are not. Eventually you will get to talk to an administrator, if you know your stuff you'll get resolved. If you don't, you will get brushed off. End of story.

If you are really "Gung-Ho" you can also use accounts with other providers to debug the problem from multiple access points.

Good luck...

Re:I had the same problem... by Anonymous Coward · 2001-01-20 11:20 · Score: 1

i wonder how many of those morons didn't listen to you because they were busy posting on slashdot.

Some cable companies block port 25 to customers by Anonymous Coward · 2001-01-20 12:12 · Score: 1

I believe the poster is actually talking about trying to send mail to SMTP servers run by @Home's customers, not to @Home's SMTP servers. It's a pretty well known fact that some of @Home's cable partners impose certain restrictions to discourage their customers from running servers, one of these restrictions being filtering port 25. @Home can't do anything about this restriction since it is imposed by the cable company, who basically runs the show-- @Home only provides the ISP services.

shotgun approach by Anonymous Coward · 2001-01-20 01:18 · Score: 2

Of course, always try the normal channels. However, if that fails, dial up the heat. Contact, all via CC: on the same email:

the administrative and technical contacts listed by network solutions
the contacts listed by ARIN
investor relations at the company (if publicly traded). visit their web page for IR contact.
try to find email addresses for higher ups (VP responsible for infrastructure, CIO/CTO, etc.)
postmaster@, security@, hostmaster@

then let it rip. You'll get mixed results, but often this will get someone's attention. Keep the email polite and to the point, but remind them that, after all, you've been trying for weeks to get this resolved the simple way, but THEY haven't been keeping their end of the bargain.

Re:shotgun approach by Art+Tatum · 2001-01-21 02:20 · Score: 1

Frontline support escalates odd/problem issues to those who can deal with it.
What ISP do *you* work for? I've never seen this happen.
Re:shotgun approach by Skapare · 2001-01-20 02:02 · Score: 2

You wouldn't get those messages if your front line people responded correctly. In fact I have specifically dealt with ZoomNet before, before it was part of Earthlink, and I had to call by phone and get one of the owners on the phone to get a DNS problem (incorrectly coded MX record) resolved. They did correct it within an hour. The thing is, sometimes it just takes finding someone who has AUTHORITY to get things done.

--
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Re:shotgun approach by Skapare · 2001-01-21 09:19 · Score: 2

It was about 2 years ago. I got past frontline because they were totally baffled (didn't know what an MX record should have). The guy who answered said he was one of the owners, and that he was there because they were replacing stuff that day. I told him the problem and he said it should be fine since that server had been back up for a few hours. He then talked to someone else and when he came back on the line, he said "Looks like they didn't convert everything right, give it an hour and I'll make sure they get it fixed". In an hour it was fixed. I didn't try earlier, so as far as I know, it could have been fixed in 5 minutes.

As for throwing jargon at clueless techs, it usually is the quickest way to get a problem escalated. Often the problem is beyond their comprehension anyway, so what else is there to do since most won't escalate just because you say "save your time, just escalate this call now" (and I wouldn't ever expect them to).

If your people love to blame the server/hardware, I wonder why that is.

--
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Re:shotgun approach by Cylix · 2001-01-20 01:35 · Score: 1

I really hate when people do this.

Who are the people who do this...

The people no one wants to talk to because they are irrate.

In the end, they send a message to every system account, and anyone else (which usually comes back to me). I have never had any real issues come through such channels... this is usually the act of a idiotic fool.

I delete those messages.

--
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
Re:shotgun approach by Cylix · 2001-01-20 02:20 · Score: 1

I seriously doubt you had the owners on the phone... unless of course this was 2+ years ago.
Even in that situation, you most likely spoke to management.

You should never get to someone who has AUTHORITY to take care of an issue, unless it is on a call back to clarify the issue.

Frontline support escalates odd/problem issues to those who can deal with it. This is the way it is and trying to go any other route will merely cause more problems. Its always in how you deliver the complaint... throwing jargon or tech speak at someone who has only a vague familiarity with the issue only compounds the problem.

Especially with our people.. they absolutely love to blame the server/hardware... it brings them warmth to escalate an issue out their hands.

--
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
Re:shotgun approach by Cylix · 2001-01-20 02:22 · Score: 1

Trust me, when it gets to this point, the person hardly makes a logical statement. Note the original author on these directions said to be polite and to the point... I cannot remember a time when I recieved a message similar to this.

Hint: boss forwards them back to me... quick reply to boss... delete... issue taken care.

--
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
Re:shotgun approach by dbrutus · 2001-01-20 10:13 · Score: 1

The above two anonymous cowards obviously didn't advertise where they work because they knew that their attitudes, if publicly known, would negatively impact sales and profitability.

Guess what, they still negatively impact sales and profitability. If you worked for me and had that attitude, I would fire your ass.

DB
Re:shotgun approach by dbrutus · 2001-01-24 00:05 · Score: 1

I notice you are still too chicken to advertise who you are or where you work. My point stands, even you know better than to let that little secret out of the bag.

As for my own reports, I've had at various times 3 or 4 at a time in a few companies. I'm currently on my own and hiring for my own company which organized a whole three months ago so I only have 5 on the payroll at the moment. I'm financing this out of my own pocket so if my attitude is so destructive, it's certainly my own ass on the line.

As to loyalty, I need to have loyalty to everybody I contract with. That includes employees and that includes customers. I certainly understand that some customers are money losers and need to be dropped, but that's not what I was complaining about. I was taking a dim view to the idea that customer escalation efforts are a reason to give purposefully bad service. That's mean, nasty, and doesn't serve anybody well. It's a betrayal on the part of my subordinates because it gives me an angrier customer base that I have to deal with and it's a lack of faith in my ability to tell the difference between a legitimate gripe and a blowhard customer inventing problems.

I'm sure we both are glad we don't have a business relationship.

DB
Re:shotgun approach by nightfire-unique · 2001-01-20 01:44 · Score: 2

I delete those messages.
Hint: your boss doesn't.

--
All men are great
before declaring war

--
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC

Re:Try nailing jello to a tree... by Anonymous Coward · 2001-01-20 02:49 · Score: 2

$ whois comp-u-geek.net -h whois.opensrs.net Registrant: Reliablehosting.com 2227 Lake Tahoe Blvd. South Lake Tahoe, ca 96150 US Domain Name: COMP-U-GEEK.NET Administrative Contact: Blancett, Phil phil@oakweb.com 2227 Lake Tahoe Blvd. South Lake Tahoe, ca 96150 US 530-542-4209 Technical Contact: Blancett, Phil phil@oakweb.com 2227 Lake Tahoe Blvd. South Lake Tahoe, ca 96150 US 530-542-4209 Billing Contact: Blancett, Phil phil@oakweb.com 2227 Lake Tahoe Blvd. South Lake Tahoe, ca 96150 US 530-542-4209 Record last updated on 20-Jan-2001. Record expires on 17-May-2001. Record Created on 17-May-2000. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.CALIFORNIA.NET 209.162.97.149 NS1.OAKWEB.COM 209.233.101.2

Re:I had similar problems with Netcom by drdink · 2001-01-20 01:58 · Score: 1

Go read this page about MAPS DUL. It will most likely explain your problem to you.

--
Beware, Nugget is watching... See?

Re:Are they really blocking port 25? by drdink · 2001-01-20 02:08 · Score: 1

I saw this behavior in the entire last week. I was trying to send e-mail to somebody on @Home, and it took about 4 days of retries before it finally went through. At the same time I called this person and asked if they were receiving any mail at all, and they were. So what the hell?

--
Beware, Nugget is watching... See?

NOC contact list by zztzed · 2001-01-20 01:09 · Score: 5

You might want to look at this. It's a list of NOC contacts for many major providers.

I don't know how up-to-date it is, though.

--

Re:NOC contact list by Mondragon · 2001-01-20 04:13 · Score: 1

Well, there you go, now every moron on the planet has puck's NOC list. If this guy *knew* anything from the start, he'd already *have* the NOC list. Basically, if you haven't got the NOC list, you obviously didn't know what you were doing anyhow. Slashdot is *not* the forum for this kind of request. Go to inet-access, or NANOG, and ask for NOC contact information. You're inability to contact their NOC does not mean that everybody on the planet needs to learn about your problem.
Re:NOC contact list by Mondragon · 2001-01-20 04:15 · Score: 1

I can't spell either.

s/You\'re/Your/
Re:NOC contact list by b0sst0ne · 2001-01-20 04:23 · Score: 1

Well, I know that NOC list is not entirely acccurate. I see that the UUNET Technologies number is actually their tech support number. I would suggest going to Network Solutions website, and looking for the tech contact's email address or phone number and calling them. Or, looking at the email address in the Start of Authority information of their DNS zone, and email that person. They should at least be more technical than a phone monkey.
Hi, my name is Bingo and I like to climb on things. Can I have a banana? EEK EEK!

Do you know this term: "Customer service"? by Eric+Green · 2001-01-20 08:05 · Score: 2

I see. So in this company, service is what a stallion does to a mare.

Which makes it just like 99.999999% of other ISP's. I do wish that people knew the meaning of the term "customer service", but must admit that it will not happen within my lifetime -- it's too easy to make money nowadays by being a complete asshole jerk. Just advertise like hell, make sure that potential competitors can't get into the market by using monopolistic practices such as exclusive contracts, and voila, you have a company like @Home. No need to have customer service -- in fact, the harder you make it for your customers to get service, the better, because then you don't have to pretend to care.

If a competing ISP could get into my local cable drop, I'd switch ISP's in a minute. But by signing monopolistic exclusive contracts with local cable providers, @Home can continue providing lousy service while not giving a damn.

I remember when you could go straight to the NOC's web site and find out what tickets were open. That headed off a lot of geeks calling in with "did you know you had a routing loop between router-xyz.dallas.net and router-zzzy.dallas.net?" You looked at the NOC's ticket list, said to yourself "Oh, they already know about that", and went your way. Today you can't do that, because the national service providers don't want you to know how crappy their service is. The sad thing is that this attempt at decieving us has convinced us that they have something to hide.

Oh well. I guess the days when producing a good product at a good price in a friendly manner was the key to success are long gone. Today the goal appears to produce the shoddiest product for the highest price while providing the crappiest service -- then advertise the hell out of it, while using monopolistic tactics to drive the guys who do believe in producing good products out of business. Sort of like Microsoft did to folks like Digital Research, Quarterdeck (remember DesqView?), and (soon) Apple.

-E

--
Send mail here if you want to reach me.

Re:Do you know this term: "Customer service"? by dbrutus · 2001-01-20 10:10 · Score: 1

One piece of the problem you don't mention is that your local government has most likely signed monopoly contracts so that you only have one cable provider.

But I don't understand why you threw apple in there at the end. They seem to be one of the few companies going in the opposite direction, from proprietary to open.

DB

There used to be a solution by Eric+Green · 2001-01-20 08:15 · Score: 3

In the old days, the major backbone NOC's kept a list of open trouble tickets available on the public Internet. So if you're doing a traceroute through Dallas and find that the Atlanta-Dallas route in the UUNET backbone is flapping (thus keeping all of your Shreveport customers from being able to reach any web site on the East Coast), you could actually go to noc.uu.net and find out whether they knew about it. If they knew about it, great. If not, you called up your local ISP, they contacted UUNET, and it got reported and fixed.

Today, if something goes down, you have no idea whether anybody knows about it or not. None of the backbone NOC's post trouble tickets to the open Internet anymore. Apparently they don't want anybody to know how lousy their service is. The sad thing is that by keeping these secret, they've caused a thousand-fold escalation in the number of phone calls coming in saying "Hey, did you know your route between Dallas and Atlanta is flapping?". Aside from convincing the rest of us that they have something to hide, of course -- but if you're part of an oligarchy that has collectively decided (illegal cartel?) to screw the customer, there isn't much I can do about you deciding to be a deceitful scumbag (well, I could create a new backbone, but that isn't exactly cost-effective).

-E

--
Send mail here if you want to reach me.

Advice for dealing with tech support by defile · 2001-01-20 02:16 · Score: 4

Most ISP technicians learn to assume that everyone has no idea what they're talking about unless they have proven otherwise. It's a safety mechanism. Failing to do so could result in hours of wasted time.

Also, if you want to be taken seriously, don't mention that you use Linux if you can help it. 5 years ago it would've meant "hardcore programmer on the line escalate to admin", it now means "Windows dork trying to survive with Linux, much hand holding is about to occur. Shield busy admins from harm!"

Don't just drop techno babble. If the technicians don't understand what you said, they'll assume (for their own safety) that you don't know anything. They will not escalate you.

Flat out asking to speak to an admin will probably just make the technician feel insulted and less inclined to help you.

For best results, if possible, work with the technician, try their suggestions (and tell them that they all failed), make him take out a trouble ticket so the whole spiel is recorded and doesn't have to be repeated. In most cases they'll escalate it when all of their suggestions fail.

These are just my observations from the inside. *shrug*

Please send me details by copito · 2001-01-20 12:20 · Score: 2

As a system administrator at Earthlink, I am interested in looking into the problem you describe. Without more information I can't say definitively whether it is due to Pac Bell, us, or you. Please send details of you investigation to the above address.

Note that this is primarily for personal interest. I may or may not be able to diagnose the problem.
--

--
"L'IT c'est moi!"

What is The Right Way by copito · 2001-01-20 12:25 · Score: 2

I can assure you that the system administrators at Earthlink are extremely concientious and try to err on the side of permissivity when trying to strike a balance between keeping our head above the spam and letting legitimate mail through. It is an extremely difficult task and we are fallible. It is clear however, that we can't afford to be hands off, nor can the rest of the net.
--

--
"L'IT c'est moi!"

Re:Get used to it... if you are a geek. by copito · 2001-01-20 12:31 · Score: 2

I'd be interested in hearing the details on this. Email me if you care to.
--

--
"L'IT c'est moi!"

Re:Earthlink is doing the same thing. by copito · 2001-01-20 12:58 · Score: 2

The average spammer uses a proggie to send hundreds of spam e-mails every hour, so why don't they just monitor the SMTP transfers per hour and then draw their own conclusions?

Let me preface this by saying that while I am an Earthlink employee, the following is a personal opinion:

The matter of port 25 blocking is disconcerting to me as a proponent of a free internet. However, spam generated by Earthlink customers dramatically affects other ISPs. There is a reason that if you look on Maps.vix.com, Earthlink's notes say something like "Formerly a prodigious source of spam."

First of all, understand that the semantics of email are seemingly designed for DOS attacks. What other protocol is designed to allow a single message to be replicated many times by an intermediate server at no cost to the originating host. Left unchecked, spam is so bad that you would never get any mail. So we fight a vailiant battle at ISPs to keep our customers free while keeping the services they depend on running at a reasonable cost. At Earthlink we have no fewer than 4 separate independent spam managament tools that I can think of off hand.

Every day I see the effects of being on the receiving end of networks which don't block port 25. While it would be eminently preferable to use traffic shaping at the router, rather than outright blocks, the protocol analysis required to identify and block spam is very involved and to the best of my knowledge can't be done at the router level except in very crude ways. For instance you can't simply monitor bytes sent, because a single message may have many recipients so the size multiplies. You can't measure connections since one SMTP connection can have multiple messages sent in it. Even at the application level it is difficult.

Tell me of a better way and we will will most likely use it. I would like nothing better than to keep the internet as unfettered as possible.
--

--
"L'IT c'est moi!"

issues. by Maznafein · 2001-01-20 01:06 · Score: 1

by chance are your mail servers in the RBL? I'm not sure if @home uses it, that might be one of the problems.

Other than that I can't think of any reason why a valid (and popular) mail server would reject mail from yours.

-maz

--
<happiness>beer</happiness>

Re:issues. by Maznafein · 2001-01-20 09:34 · Score: 1

this wednesday evening is my friday :P I plan on getting drunk :P

--
<happiness>beer</happiness>
Re:issues. by RickAfterburner · 2001-01-20 20:16 · Score: 1

Another thing to check is that I've run into problems with some sites where they cannot resolve mail domains if you have both an MX record and an A or CNAME record for the base domain (whatever.org). Some of these sites will then refuse incoming mail as the sending domain is unresolvable (to that host). -R...

Think that's bad? by Evangelion · 2001-01-20 05:20 · Score: 1

I'm an @home customer, and *I* can't connect to thier SMTP servers.

At one point a few months ago, thier mail servers started terminating my connections on port 25. Even if I open a telnet session on port 25, I get disconnected before I do anything. Since I don't even mention my login/password to it, it's clearly not that - it must be denying me based on IP or whatever.

I called thier useless tech support people, which of course forced me to set up outlook (twice) just so they could be shown that it wasn't *my* problem. They also made me unplug my firewall, and plug my windows box into the network directly, and I was still getting the same error (I had no problem with this, unlike the Outlook fiasco - if telnet doesn't work...).

I got escalated to level 2, and then they sent a notice or whatever out to @home people (this was a Rogers tech support centre I think), and then the ticket got closed, apparently my 'problem solved'. Which, of course, it wasn't. Did that again. Then again. Every time, they were telling me the problem had been fixed when it hadn't been.

I gave up and am using a friend's mail server he has set up on DSL.

I should pursue this, I guess...

--

Re:Think that's bad? by pixistixgrl · 2001-01-20 07:35 · Score: 1

i can only check my mail @home on my linux box thats firewalling.....inside the network, nada...

--
~Help the space cows are comming for me....

like act you're a big sysadmin by hazard · 2001-01-20 02:42 · Score: 1

I work as a senior sysadmin at one of the bigger ISPs in country, so most of the time I deal with major problems.

Usually when I have a problem which is in somebody's else network (mostly BGP routing/mail filtering) I call to their official tech support, make serious voice and say "Good day, I'm a senior sysadmin from XXX, it seems you have a problem and none of customers can reach you, can you connect me to somebody responsible for routers / BGP / servers / SMTP?"

Believe, most of them time I get connected at least to somebody who can recognize the problem and connect to a higher level admin if needed.
So, in your case, try calling them and pretend that you have a bigger problem than it really is. :-)

And don't know about @Home, but here I go through unresolved cases through our support system from time to time, just in case the problem didn't get to higher levels.

Sympatico and Yahoo by kidlinux · 2001-01-20 05:23 · Score: 1

Sympatico block/s/ed all incoming mail from yahoo.com addresses. When I used their service there was all kinds of complaints on their news groups, and it didn't seem as though anything was being done about it. It might have had something to do with spam coming from yahoo.com, but I really couldn't confirm that.

--
-kidlinux.

Codeword by Pseudonymus+Bosch · 2001-01-22 03:36 · Score: 2

I propose that we have a secret geek codeword that can immediately identify each of us as a member of the geek commmunity

We have. We will tell you when you are ready.
__

--
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu

@HOME not wanted in many places by mauriceh · 2001-01-20 11:29 · Score: 1

Our local University's Computing & Network Services people became so tired of @HOME they now block all @HOME users accessing the university networks through @HOME Proxy Servers.
Their published policy is pretty harsh on this.
See:
http://ice-atm.ucs.ualberta.ca/htbin/blocknotice ?p x4ar.html

--
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907

Re:Earthlink is doing the same thing. by marmoset · 2001-01-20 03:09 · Score: 1

See, but this is patently goofball. If all people
who call themselves mail admins were to take minimal
precautions (no open relays, require some form of authentication [pop before smtp, etc.] before allowing an SMTP connection, subscribing to one of the several extant mail-abuse blackhole lists, etc. (you know, the common sense stuff), then ISPs wouldn't have to block _any_ outgoing ports.

Re:Earthlink is doing the same thing. by fade · 2001-01-20 06:19 · Score: 1

sure, but in that circumstance any correctly configured mail server would reject mail coming from a dial pool anyhow, so the "openness" of the port is completely moot. The only people you would be able to send mail to would be people on other dial access connections. The conversation is ludicrous.

Fully 50% of the SPAM I used to see originated from the dialpools of the gargantuan ISPs of the world. UUnet, Earthlink, PSInet etc. Since I have converted all of the mail servers I administer to utilise the MAPS-DUL the spam traversing my network has been massively cut down. None of these servers will accept smtp traffic from inside dial-pool netblocks. the RBL is very effective against the cretins who run open exchangers. I would like to note that since implementing the MAPS-DUL, my stress level has also signifigantly dropped as I no longer have to endure the silly autoresponders that these large ISPs have working the abuse@ , postmaster@, and root@ email addresses. I'm positive that the majority of abuse mail is piped to /dev/nul.

port scan usually gets a response by drwho · 2001-01-20 02:00 · Score: 1

Seriously, nmap their servers. when someone writes back complaining, you have a contact to get stuff fixed.

I'd also check whois on thei main domains.

If all else fails, dig for titles on their web page, sr. whatever and work your way down. that's a lot easier than working your way up.

RTFPost Please. by Alan+Shutko · 2001-01-20 03:01 · Score: 2

It clearly said that Pac Bell wasn't blocking port 25, but that Earthlink was blocking Pac Bell's DSL users.

Re:RTFPost Please. by jmp100 · 2001-01-20 09:49 · Score: 1

That is because they got sick of getting spammed by people who would sign up for an account at some ISP and then spam directly from their own box rather than going through their ISP's mail servers. This is "smart" for the spammers because the ISP they are going through doesn't notice all the mail going through. So you have to relay your mail through someone else's server? Big fat hairy deal. Just set up smarthosting or something similar.

Re:Get used to it... if you are a geek. by mortonda · 2001-01-20 07:55 · Score: 1

This doesn't always work either... we had someone who was confusing our front line techs with terms like traceroute... (Ok, we need to train our front line a little more)

The problem actually ended up being that they were dialed in on a email only account - everything but email to our server was firewalled out. Certainly not an issue to bother the sysadmins about.

Netcom SMTP server bug-test... by Turambar · 2001-01-20 05:53 · Score: 1

I reported this problem to Netcom about 6 years ago. After many e-mails, phone calls, and 12 months of being ignored, the problem was still there. I switched ISPs (obviously), but wonder if Netcom has bothered to fix the problem yet.

Try this out: Cut and paste the following text and send the e-mail to yourself.

==== Begin SMTP Bug-test =====
This text should appear in the reply whether they have a bug or not.
.
But this text, however, will disappear if they have the bug.
==== End SMTP Bug-test =====

The problem is that putting a "." on a line all by itself is the way to tell an SMTP server that the message is done. That's what the RFC tells us. However, to prevent a line of your e-mail message from inadvertently terminating the message, good SMTP servers have various work arounds.

A test of their current systems reveals the following:

$ telnet smtp.ix.netcom.com 25
Trying 207.69.200.110...
Connected to smtp6.mindspring.com (207.69.200.110).
Escape character is '^]'.
220 smtp6.mindspring.com ESMTP Sendmail 8.9.3/8.8.5; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:23:45 -0500 (EST)
quit
221 smtp6.mindspring.com closing connection
Connection closed by foreign host.

So my bug is fixed. (However, 8.9.3 is not exactly the most secure SMTP server to use...)

Also, if anyone is using Earthlink, run nmap on your own box, then run nmap on another box you know is running SMTP services. Earthlink filters port 25! Some troll pointed out that it is their _right_ to do this, but my problem is that my mail was black-holed - not bounced back to me. If they are going to stop spam by filtering, then they should do it The Right Way.

Turambar
------------------------------
Common sense is not so common.
--Voltaire

--

Turambar
------------------------------
Common sense is not so common.
--Voltaire

Re:Contacting Admins/support woes by m0nkyman · 2001-01-20 05:52 · Score: 1

Remember, when telling a story about how wonderful a company was to you ,to TELL US WHO IT WAS!!! That way we can support intelligence, instead of just punishing stupidity.

--
~ a low user id is no indication I have a clue what I'm talking about.

Help me figure this one out.. by MentlFlos · 2001-01-20 01:55 · Score: 1

I go to school here at Rochester Institute of Technology. I came back at the beginning of the year and was pleased to find out that port 25 was unblocked. So, when I registered my domain I threw a mail server up. A few weeks ago I just stop getting mail. I can send fine, just not receive. Resnet's reason is the following.

Port 25 is blocked to prevent the proliferation of email servers. When someone sets up a mail server, and then moves, the mail going to the original server location defaults to the main campus servers. This presents numerous problems for us. Thus, it was decided in ages past to block port 25 for the entire campus.

Now I just don't get this. If you send mail to a user@ipaddress and the machine is down, why would it attempt to hit a totally different server (related only in domain name, and even that isn't always true). Does it try and hit the secondary mail server even though it didn't do any lookups for the first? Someone please help my brain out.

---------------------------------------
The art of flying is throwing yourself at the ground...
... and missing.

Re:Help me figure this one out.. by MentlFlos · 2001-01-20 13:47 · Score: 1

Yeah, I guess it kinda makes sense in that _if_ I was under their domain...but in my case I was/am using my own domain so any mail that did not get delivered just waited for my server to come back to life. It never rolled over to a secondary MX record because I never set one up.

I guess I'm just paying for other peoples misconfigured boxes/stupidity

-paul
---------------------------------------
The art of flying is throwing yourself at the ground...
... and missing.
Re:Help me figure this one out.. by professorx · 2001-01-20 07:05 · Score: 1

OF course instead of a rollup to an email address, you could configure an email server to bounce or give an error msg. Only problem is that if there are any misconfigurations or problems then mail may get lost.

it won't do any good. by cabbey · 2001-01-20 05:10 · Score: 1

The bad news is that the @home NOC's mail is filtered, if it doesn't come from a very select list of people (their own L3 tech support, select NOCs that they have peering agreements with, etc) it is bit bucketed automatically. Here's the fast path route: call your local @home offering cable company, get in touch with *their* support group and make a friend, they in turn have a friend in the L3 support staff in @home, who can finally get the message to the NOC. Sad but true, you've got to follow the chain of command... but with any luck you can avoid the idiots that can't even spell IP let alone grok a routing table.

Re:I had similar problems with Netcom by cabbey · 2001-01-20 05:15 · Score: 1

BellSouth's abuse@ reputation is terible... so yes, the hackers/spammers/etc like to buy their bandwidth there... the rest of the BellSouth user base is "guilty by association".

Re:Good idea, do it. by einstein · 2001-01-20 02:19 · Score: 2

Do you have any idea how frightfully outnumbered we are? If every (seriously) technically competent dsl user dropped off the world completely, I doubt they would even notice.

true, we are outnumbered, but there is nothing keeping the less technical from using the service if it proves superior.

--

I post links to stuff here

Re:AOL also blocks PORT 25 by BJH · 2001-01-20 21:20 · Score: 1

...because America's largest (sudo) ISP...

It took me a moment, but the word you're looking for there is pseudo, not "sudo".

I was trying to figure out what root permissions had to do with AOL, until I tried reading it aloud...

bs in whois record by jonbrewer · 2001-01-20 02:56 · Score: 1

If you don't want to be contacted, there's nothing keeping you from filling your whois record with crap. For example, looking at my domain (which is virt-hosted now, but at one point occupied a nice little class C) you'll find that my telephone number is 555-1212. (That's a common information line) The email works, though I only check it every few months.

I used to have good information in there, but I found it was abused by all manner of advertisers and fifteen year-old geeks who thought they knew what they were talking about.

(I'm glad I no longer have a job where I'm responsible for The Internet.)

Re:bs in whois record by blackdevl · 2001-01-20 09:15 · Score: 1

But still, if you are talking about a large company or ISP (AOL/@home/etc...) most likely the WHOIS information is correct and will get you someone in the company that might be able to help you.
Re:bs in whois record by jmp100 · 2001-01-20 10:03 · Score: 1

Well, I run a domain with reverse DNS. If I go on IRC (where the rDNS reveals my domain name) and someone is being a twit and I kickban them, I don't want them to be able to whois my domain, find my house, and snail-mail me a fish, or dog shit, or a bomb, or a box of disentery, or whatever. There should be ZER0 requirement for specifying a correct address - there are FAR too many loons in this world, and they have 24 HOURS A DAY to figure out whatever it takes to screw with you. That's why I have a bogus address in there. It's enough that they have my e-mail address.
Re:bs in whois record by professorx · 2001-01-20 06:43 · Score: 1

A good example of that is gohip (the legal web-based virus), and page creators.net. They deliberately had false listings in the admin contact, because the comapny was not on the up and up. Samething with any spammers domain, they do NOT want to be contact, and there is no current penalty for listing false information in the admin contact).

Re:Think... by IntlHarvester · 2001-01-20 02:26 · Score: 1

Your work should have a VPN to minimize sniffing of internal mail traffic sent by work-from-home people.

Likewise smtp.work.com shouldn't be relaying messages from random IPs just because the sender claims to be someguy@work.com. Otherwise smtp.work.com *will* become a spam server.

Limited Port 25 access is going to be a universal fact of life on the spam-filled Internet of the future, so everyone might as well get used to it. Most of this is due to the limitations of the SMTP protocol, so it only makes sense to layer other authentication mechinisms such as VPNs.
--

--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.

Re:Earthlink is doing the same thing. by IntlHarvester · 2001-01-20 02:47 · Score: 2

According to http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/port- numbers, SMTP runs on 25/TCP and 25/UDP. Although most traffic is on TCP, perhaps there's MTAs that would accept UDP.
--

--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.

Re:NOT. Earthlink is doing the same thing. by Lord_Byron · 2001-01-22 06:53 · Score: 1

Sort of. They (hopefully) block mail sent to a domain from whom Earthlink does not provide mail services, if it is not sent from an Earthlink IP. In other words, they are not an open mail relay. This prevents some SPAM to non-Earthlink customers, and is a Good Thing.

They also block an Earthlink customer from connecting on TCP port 25 to anywhere except their mail servers, which will then legitimately relay that traffic. This annoys me, since it means I have to change configs when away from the office. It also prevents some SPAM, again to non-Earthlink customers. It would be nicer to only block large quantities of SMTP traffic, but harder.

What *really* burns me up about this is that despite the fact that exactly three people know my Earthlink address, I get huge amounts of SPAM there, *and* I can't use my Sendmail server to send my mail.

BTW, if they did what you said they did, no mail would ever get to Earthlink customers, except from Earthlink customers.

Re:Think... by Lord_Byron · 2001-01-22 07:17 · Score: 1

But then when you get back to the office, you have to change it back. It's a *nuisance*, for little perceived gain.

Re:I had similar problems with Netcom by Panaflex · 2001-01-20 06:58 · Score: 1

Well until the commercialization of the internet, this was not true. It was pretty easy before 1996 to call sprint's backbone NOC center and talk directly to a real network engineer. (Which I have done a few times).

But now that 90% of the internet is for Mom & Pop users - it is a deeper hassle to actually talk to the people that work.

Pan

--
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.

How do they keep track of server IPs? by swb · 2001-01-20 03:05 · Score: 1

How do they manage to keep track of the IPs used by major ISP's mail servers? Lucky guesses? Laborous investigation?

It strikes me as a somewhat dangerous technique. All Pac Bell needs to do is futz around with their email servers or net topology and *bang* a whole lot of PacBell email starts bouncing because the "anti-spam" provider isn't current on their configuration.

I can see the idea of a central registry of "official" email servers for a given netblock becoming popular; sites not in it can't send to registry users mail servers, and ISPs get another reason to price-tier their DSL service.

I can hear it now: "An SMTP server registry isn't available to consumer customers. It is available to our business grade customers, but that service starts at $99/mo.."

Re:How do they keep track of server IPs? by A+Masquerade · 2001-01-20 21:52 · Score: 2

Step 1. Reverse DNS lookup on domain name.
And this does what exactly? What do you expect to see? Do you pattern match for something that looks like a dial up or what.
Step 3. Compare IP address and MX address. If they are not equal, bounce mail.
So you have now found a way of bouncing mail from *every* large ISP around - *no-one* running a decent sized installation uses the same machines for incoming and outgoing mail.

And that comment just shows the real problem - every idiot thinks they know how to run an ISP. Go away and come back when you have sucessfully built a 1 million (or larger) user mail system - I have, and it needs plenty of experience and knowledge (and also some luck).
Re:How do they keep track of server IPs? by Baz+Quux · 2001-01-20 14:22 · Score: 1

But, but, (not to suggest that you personally agree with this), what is the rule that says a mailhost should only accept email from other hosts that have MX records? MX records are for determining the destination of mail, and have nothing to do with its origin. Sites of any size frequently use different machines for end-user outgoing SMTP relay, rather than their main incoming MX hosts, in order to shed unnecessary load.
--
Re:How do they keep track of server IPs? by blakestah · 2001-01-20 03:51 · Score: 3

How do they manage to keep track of the IPs used by major ISP's mail servers? Lucky guesses? Laborous investigation?

Step 1. Reverse DNS lookup on domain name.
Step 2. Check domain name entry for IP address
for MX value
Step 3. Compare IP address and MX address. If they are not equal, bounce mail.
Re:How do they keep track of server IPs? by SomeoneYouDontKnow · 2001-01-20 04:11 · Score: 1

They might be using the MAPS DUL. It doesn't list the IPs of mail servers, but it does list the IPs of POPs, the idea being that a POP has no business connecting to a non-local mail server. POPs can be listed by the ISPs that own them, or they might also get listed if someone manages to compile a list of an ISPs POPs, usually because lots of spam is coming out of that provider.

--
That light you see at the end of the tunnel might be from an oncoming train.

Some do track your Fu. by Wokan · 2001-01-20 06:56 · Score: 1

I was pleasantly surprised when I called @home on an outage issue and asked that they add a name to my account so she could also call in outages. The tech I talked to actually filled me in on some of the notes others had typed about me. I guess being understanding of their position helps (as opposed to ranting and raving about outages). I have fairly rapid access to tier 2 now (which I avoid using for simple things).
If you get to know the techs a little bit, and what they are and aren't allowed to do by the company, it can get you pretty far in getting the right level of support. Tier 1 wasn't even able (maybe just allowed) to do tracert from their systems. It wouldn't surprise me if tier 1 used checksheets and screenshots instead of actual computers if it wasn't for the record they have access to about me. (Perhaps they can't leave that particular application without getting in trouble.)
Digital Wokan
I wanted to spend 8 years defending the US constitution.

Re:Solution: RECORD EVERYTHING by sherms · 2001-01-21 02:38 · Score: 1

It depends on your state, in Utah, only one party has to know. Some companies have there one policy, but as far as State law only one has to know.

Sherm

Re:AOL also blocks PORT 25 by Royster · 2001-01-21 23:52 · Score: 2

Following Lisa's posting about "@Home blocking PORT 25" I would like to add that AOL does the same thing.

And good for them. AOL has been castigated for years as spammers used to grab a disposable AOL account, point to and open relay and spew until the plug got pulled. do {} while (1);

So AOL filters outgoing port 25. You were able to work around it by using a different port for your SMTP. Excellent. But don't criticize them for taking an action.

It's the tragedy of the commons.

--
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i

Re:Earthlink is doing the same thing. by Skapare · 2001-01-20 01:47 · Score: 2

Earthlink does not offer SMTP connection services. They offer email through their arrays of mail servers. This is not censorship; it's just a decision about what mechanism they choose to offer.