Verizon Actually does offer a cable-modem service. They inherited GTE's
worldwind service. I had it until a couple of months ago. In my
experience it was alot slower and more unreliable than RR. The only
good thing about it was that I had a year-long contract to get a bunch
of premium channels and the Internet service for $50 dollars a month.
I'm paying close to $100/month now, but i think it's worth it.
On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 10:44, Ian C. Blenke wrote:
> On Saturday 02 November 2002 01:21, bpreece1@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
> > It does not matter whether you are using Dial up or Broad Band.
> > Verizon does not have anything to do with weather you can get into
> > another's SMTP. They only monitor their own.
>
> Verizon doesn't do "Broad Band" (DSL isn't like cable BroadBand, it's a
> point-to-point connection with a DSLAM), but their marketing does call it
> that. Really, Broadband and Baseband are old terms that have largely lost any
> of their original meaning. In a way, DSL is technically broadband (multiple
> parallel carrier frequencies existing on the same wire).
>
> Using their ISP service, Verizon *can* filter ports and otherwise intercept
> SMTP traffic and refuse to carry it. If you're using an alternate DSL IP
> provider (which generally use Verizon's DSLAMs with a Frame or ATM peering),
> then you wouldn't have this problem. Just as TimeWarner allows others to
> resell their BroadBand service, Verizon does the same. If you're not happy
> with Verizon's IP service, you can use one of the dozen others in the area
> that will carry your traffic without incident over the exact same network.
>
> > How ever with most isp's you can receive by remote but not send.
> > This means for instance right now I have both Road Runner and
> > Mindspring/Earthlink.
> > I can get pop 3 from Mindspring/Earthlink thru Road Runner but again can
> > not send.
>
> Are you subscribing to Earthlink's BroadBand service, or are you subscribing
> to RoadRunner's BroadBand service and using pop3 on your Earthlink account?
>
> If you're using a RoadRunner IP address, you should be able to use a
> RoadRunner SMTP relay. I honestly don't know if they also require the message
> to be coming from a "user@tampabay.rr.com" address as well. They seem to
> allow outbound SMTP direct (not filtered like Verizon), which is what I use
> for all mail at home.
>
> If you're being assigned an EarthLink IP address, then you would need to use
> your EarthLink SMTP relay. I'd like to hear if this is actually happening.
> >From my DOCSIS DHCP lease sniffs, I haven't a clue as to the public IP
> addresses being assigned to TimeWarner customers - only the RFC1918 private
> 10.x network addresses.
>
> > Mindspring/earthlink does not want you to be able to use SMTP as stated by
> > IAN because they feel this will
> > control Spam. How ever we all know that is Bull as also stated.
>
> I stated this? Perhaps a while back.
>
> They are indeed attempting to stop spamming from their BroadBand customers.
> I'm not sure how this is bull. If you can't send SMTP mail, you can't send
> SMTP mail. Period. The only hope you have is to find a relay/gateway on
> another network and use non-SMTP filtered ports to relay mail through it.
> This effectively kills all spam originating directly from Verizon's IP
> network
>
> If you don't like it, don't pay for their service. I wouldn't ;)
>
> > I can also access Mindspring/Earthlink Pop3 Remote through Verizons but
> > again no SMTP!
>
> So, in order to send mail through Verizon's restricted relay, you must use
> your @verizon.com customer assigned email address? Sounds like a good
> anti-spam measure to me.
>
> People who use unencrypted pop3 mail over the Internet proper scare the hell
> out of me anyway. This isn't targeted at any one person - I'm amazed at the
> general lack of concern about passwords and unencrypted email being sent in
> the clear across the backbone. It personally scares the living hell out of
> me.
>
> > Now if you have your own server set up then you set the permissions as to
> > what get's through from what Domain. Unless they decide to filter your
> > domain from their access which they usually will not bother.
> > Because it is not there servers in this Scenario.
>
> To "filter your domain', they would need to add a router ACL to limit access
> to a given IP/IP:port. As this is not truely a security concern, and ACLs
> only eat up router memory and slow down traffic, why would they add this to
> block a single external relay on a non-standard port? It simply cannot make
> sense for them to do so. Hurray for us.
>
> It is true, though, as soon as the mail is bounced through an external
> non-standard mail gateway it is no longer their network acting as a relay,
> which removes their culpability as a spam source.
>
> --
> - Ian C. Blenke <icblenke@nks.net>
>
> (This message bound by the following:
> http://www.nks.net/email_disclaimer.html)
>
>
-- Ryland Bingham Unix/Linux Specialist T3 Technologies, Inc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:56:56 EDT