--=-EqpyBAV61hcMNaNmT9+c Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 18:57, Augie Grayfox wrote: > *v*The reason they should have given is you are trying to relay mail. A > *v*tactic that most spammers have used for years. They consider you as a > *v*spammer and should block your mail. I certainly would if I were them.= =3D20 > *v*Relays are bad news and cause other customers grief. > *v* > How the HELL is sending an email from my @cox address to my client's @xxx= .com=20 > address be considered relaying? > I thought that was just emailing somebody? Well I can configure my boxes to send @cox email to @xxx.com and have it be a relay. Just because you have an address of @cox doesn't mean you are not relaying. Now if you have things configured on your side to directly use their mail servers and not route through so it looks like a relay, then yeah you have a legitimate gripe and I apologize. I have never seen a "relay" error where the host wasn't relaying. Perhaps they have their end that severely mis-configured. > By your reasoning and apparantly cox' anybody that sends ANY email is rel= aying=20 > therefore a spammer > PULLLEEEEASE get real! I don't know your setup, but for right or wrong I would suspect if they have internal relay problems, they would have enough Windows customers pissed off they would be trying to fix it. Fortunately or unfortunately GNU/Linux generally comes with mail servers of its own and its easy to accidently misconfigure them. If you have everything configured correctly and they really are that fscked up, I apologize and you have every right to be pissed. > The only reason I mentioned this was to basically rant about crappie tech= =20 > support that seems to unduly single out Linux users.=20 I haven't experienced this. In fact, they have been quite a bit better than most. They don't do anything to "help", but they don't refuse to talk to me because I simply run GNU/Linux. > I'm sorry if I ruffled any feathers for badmouthing anybody's favorite IS= P and=20 > no I'm not switching from cox, been with them for years. I may continue t= o=20 > use them, but that don't mean I have to like they're discriminatory treat= ment=20 > of non m$ users. Um I they are not my favorite by a long shot. Read the archives. I always recommend getting VDSL first and DSL second if one has the choice. I would not have Cox at all if I had either V/DSL available to me. --=20 Derek Neighbors GNU Enterprise http://www.gnuenterprise.org derek@gnue.org Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=3Ddneighbo --=-EqpyBAV61hcMNaNmT9+c Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBAHI+xHb99+vQX/88RAuaFAJ9234mMKOTpfcl/kKLfiM+yBcnMsQCdGCnt BydAtw7rZjHT0akScCVFRAE= =0zIs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-EqpyBAV61hcMNaNmT9+c--