RE: Well, my VAX won't make a year of uptime after all #2

< -----Original Message----- < From: Bradford J. Hamilton [mailto:brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org] < Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 5:33 PM < To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com < Subject: Re: Well, my VAX won't make a year of uptime after all < < < In article < <63D30D6E10CFD11190A90000F805FE8605AED1BF@lespaul.process.com>, < Mike Duffy <Duffy@process.com> writes: < ! < !Ever since I put my VAXstation 3100 into service as < !an email and FTP machine six years ago (currently < !running VMS V7.3), I have yet to make a year of consecutive < !uptime. Hurricane season has been to blame more < !than once, as well as other prolonged power < !outages that seem to come at an average interval < !of about 200 days in this area (near Baltimore, < !MD, USA.) < ! < < Please indulge my curiosity - does your ISP have a problem with < you running an < email server? If not, can you share with us your experience, < either in this < forum, or privately? I have a MicroVAX 3100-96 that I would like < to put to < work (running TCPware). Not sure why you think there is a problem. You basically just rent a line, get a static ip and have your MX records point to it. Your ISP should be able to take care of all that. < < !I've always wanted to brag to my friends about the < !years-long uptimes others here have enjoyed, and < !I was closing in on the one-year mark for the first < !time ever, with an uptime of 327 days. < ! < < BTW - have you considered becoming part of the "Uptimes Project"? < ( http://uptimes.hostingwired.com/ ) I can't think of a better < way to "brag". < < !snip! < < __________________________________________________________________________ < Bradford J. Hamilton "All opinions are my own" < bMradAhamiPltSon-at-coMmcAast.nPeSt "Lose the MAPS, and < replace '-at-' < with @" < < --- < Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. < Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). < Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004 < --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004

In article <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMECKDMAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: !snip! !< Please indulge my curiosity - does your ISP have a problem with !< you running an !< email server? If not, can you share with us your experience, !< either in this !< forum, or privately? I have a MicroVAX 3100-96 that I would like !< to put to !< work (running TCPware). !Not sure why you think there is a problem. You basically just rent a !line, get a static ip and have your MX records point to it. Your ISP !should be able to take care of all that. True, but I'm used to an ISP that hands out dynamic addresses only - I was "hoping" that there was a way to cope with that scenario. Perhaps not. :-) !snip! __________________________________________________________________________ Bradford J. Hamilton "All opinions are my own" bMradAhamiPltSon-at-coMmcAast.nPeSt "Lose the MAPS, and replace '-at-' with @"

In article <T4t%c.21419$vy.9144@attbi_s52>, brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes: >In article <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMECKDMAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: >!snip! >!< Please indulge my curiosity - does your ISP have a problem with >!< you running an >!< email server? If not, can you share with us your experience, >!< either in this >!< forum, or privately? I have a MicroVAX 3100-96 that I would like >!< to put to >!< work (running TCPware). >!Not sure why you think there is a problem. You basically just rent a >!line, get a static ip and have your MX records point to it. Your ISP >!should be able to take care of all that. > >True, but I'm used to an ISP that hands out dynamic addresses only - I was >"hoping" that there was a way to cope with that scenario. Perhaps not. :-) There is. Use www.dyndns.org or another dynamic DNS site. You reserve a name, you tell them whenever your numeric-IP changes - and there are ways to do this automatically - and your new numeric-IP propagates around accordingly. -- Alan

Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing wrote: > In article <T4t%c.21419$vy.9144@attbi_s52>, brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes: > >>In article <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMECKDMAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: >>>!Not sure why you think there is a problem. You basically just rent a >>!line, get a static ip and have your MX records point to it. Your ISP >>!should be able to take care of all that. >> >>True, but I'm used to an ISP that hands out dynamic addresses only - I was >>"hoping" that there was a way to cope with that scenario. Perhaps not. :-) > > There is. Use www.dyndns.org or another dynamic DNS site. You reserve a name, > you tell them whenever your numeric-IP changes - and there are ways to do this > automatically - and your new numeric-IP propagates around accordingly. Several Broadband ISP's specifically prohibit running servers on their residential services or their DHCP addresses. Some do not actively enforce their TOS until there is a complaint. Easynet.nl used to have a web page that listed links to the TOS of several ISPs. And in my area, there is only one ISP that will supply anything other than dialup, and they do not have any service plan that allows servers, even if you pay extra for business, or for a fixed I.P. address. In addition, none of the mail servers that I get mail from will now accept e-mail directly from any I.P. address known to be dynamically assigned. When my broadband supplier implemented DNSbls on the mail servers for open proxies and known DHCP pools, the spam leakage has dropped to almost nothing from about 35 to 40 per day. Back to the original posting, A machine check usually indicates a hardware problem of some sort, with a smaller probability of a software problem, usually in a device driver. Putting a power conditioner or UPS may prevent the occurrence if it was from a power glitch. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only

In article <YqudnebBJa2uFKPcRVn-gA@adelphia.com>, "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> writes: >Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing wrote: >> In article <T4t%c.21419$vy.9144@attbi_s52>, brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes: >> >>>In article <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMECKDMAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: >>>>!Not sure why you think there is a problem. You basically just rent a >>>!line, get a static ip and have your MX records point to it. Your ISP >>>!should be able to take care of all that. >>> >>>True, but I'm used to an ISP that hands out dynamic addresses only - I was >>>"hoping" that there was a way to cope with that scenario. Perhaps not. :-) >> >> There is. Use www.dyndns.org or another dynamic DNS site. You reserve a name, >> you tell them whenever your numeric-IP changes - and there are ways to do this >> automatically - and your new numeric-IP propagates around accordingly. > >Several Broadband ISP's specifically prohibit running servers on their >residential services or their DHCP addresses. Some do not actively >enforce their TOS until there is a complaint. I have learned recently (and I applaud their decision) that Optimum On-line cable modem service has blocked port 25 and myriad other ports used exclus- ively by Micro$oft (in addition to port 80 which they blocked to thwart the spread of the Nimda Micro$oft IIS virus a year+ ago) for their subscribers. This will cut down on SPAM and viruses spreading from their PeeCee customers by enforcing that email originating on their network travel only via servers maintained by OOL making it easier to trace/track down violator and infected PeeCees. >And in my area, there is only one ISP that will supply anything other >than dialup, and they do not have any service plan that allows servers, >even if you pay extra for business, or for a fixed I.P. address. You don't have a phone company? I'm fairly certain your phone company would love to lease you a T1. ;) :) >In addition, none of the mail servers that I get mail from will now >accept e-mail directly from any I.P. address known to be dynamically >assigned. More positive news! >When my broadband supplier implemented DNSbls on the mail servers for >open proxies and known DHCP pools, the spam leakage has dropped to >almost nothing from about 35 to 40 per day. I have noticed a decrease in recent months of the amount of SPAM that my SPAM filter has rejected. The big problem today is the stupid but legitimate SMTP servers that bounce messages with feigned From: headers to me. I believe the broadband providers are now beginning lock down their networks -- either be- cause they want to look like responsible netizens or because their bandwidth requirements are being overwhelmed by increased number of subscribers running Micro$oft SPAMdeli(tm) email products and Micro$oft Petri Dish(tm) virus cul- turing and transmitting products. -- http://www.ProvN.com for the *best* OpenVMS system security solutions that others only claim to be. -- Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.: The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product! -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

In article <00A37891.F2430492@ssrl.slac.stanford.edu>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) writes: > In article <T4t%c.21419$vy.9144@attbi_s52>, brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes: >>In article <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMECKDMAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: >>!snip! >>!< Please indulge my curiosity - does your ISP have a problem with >>!< you running an >>!< email server? If not, can you share with us your experience, >>!< either in this >>!< forum, or privately? I have a MicroVAX 3100-96 that I would like >>!< to put to >>!< work (running TCPware). >>!Not sure why you think there is a problem. You basically just rent a >>!line, get a static ip and have your MX records point to it. Your ISP >>!should be able to take care of all that. >> >>True, but I'm used to an ISP that hands out dynamic addresses only - I was >>"hoping" that there was a way to cope with that scenario. Perhaps not. :-) > > There is. Use www.dyndns.org or another dynamic DNS site. You reserve a name, > you tell them whenever your numeric-IP changes - and there are ways to do this > automatically - and your new numeric-IP propagates around accordingly. > Don't expect that to work if you actually expect anyone to accept your email. Most places today reject mail where the name presented doesn't match the reverse dns lookup, which they won't using a "dynamic DNS site". It is also very common to reject any site that maps to a dynamic address pool as returned by ORBS sites. Our SPAM dropped by over 90% when we introduced just these two methods. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>

bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes in article <2q968jFt029aU2@uni-berlin.de> dated 8 Sep 2004 19:52:51 GMT: >Don't expect that to work if you actually expect anyone to accept your email. >Most places today reject mail where the name presented doesn't match the >reverse dns lookup, I haven't had any problem like that. I have a static IP from my ISP and a domain through godaddy.com. The IP maps to the ISP's domain. Heck, TCPIP services even supports multiple e-mail domains on a single IP. Somebody must use that feature (legitimately). >which they won't using a "dynamic DNS site". >It is also very common to reject any site that maps to a dynamic address pool >as returned by ORBS sites. > >Our SPAM dropped by over 90% when we introduced just these two methods. You could unplug your server and your spam would drop by 100%. That doesn't mean it's good practice. --Keith Lewis klewis {at} mitre.org The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.

In article <chnvu0$edh$2@newslocal.mitre.org>, lewis@PROBE.MITRE.ORG (Keith A. Lewis) writes: > bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes in article <2q968jFt029aU2@uni-berlin.de> dated 8 Sep 2004 19:52:51 GMT: >>Don't expect that to work if you actually expect anyone to accept your email. >>Most places today reject mail where the name presented doesn't match the >>reverse dns lookup, > > I haven't had any problem like that. I have a static IP from my ISP and a > domain through godaddy.com. The IP maps to the ISP's domain. Heck, TCPIP > services even supports multiple e-mail domains on a single IP. Somebody > must use that feature (legitimately). You don't have a dynamic address, that's the point. That protects you from ORBS. But if you lie about who you are then other sites will reject you for it. If you have a legitimate MX that maps to your real IP address then your OK. > >>which they won't using a "dynamic DNS site". >>It is also very common to reject any site that maps to a dynamic address pool >>as returned by ORBS sites. >> >>Our SPAM dropped by over 90% when we introduced just these two methods. > > You could unplug your server and your spam would drop by 100%. That doesn't > mean it's good practice. Not accepting email from machines that should not be sending it is good practice. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>

In article <T4t%c.21419$vy.9144@attbi_s52>, brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes: > True, but I'm used to an ISP that hands out dynamic addresses only - I was > "hoping" that there was a way to cope with that scenario. Perhaps not. :-) Check out http://www.dynaccess.de/ (only in German, I believe). They are similar to http://www.dyndns.org/, but offer more features. In particular, they offer an SMTP relay based on your (dynamic) IP address, which of course they know. You can thus send via a non-black-listed relay without relying on SMTP authentification etc. Also no problem receiving my mail locally.

bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes in article <2q9lfuFt9o8hU1@uni-berlin.de> dated 9 Sep 2004 00:12:46 GMT: >In article <chnvu0$edh$2@newslocal.mitre.org>, > lewis@PROBE.MITRE.ORG (Keith A. Lewis) writes: >> bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes in article <2q968jFt029aU2@uni-berlin.de> dated 8 Sep 2004 19:52:51 GMT: >>>Don't expect that to work if you actually expect anyone to accept your email. >>>Most places today reject mail where the name presented doesn't match the >>>reverse dns lookup, >> >> I haven't had any problem like that. I have a static IP from my ISP and a >> domain through godaddy.com. The IP maps to the ISP's domain. Heck, TCPIP >> services even supports multiple e-mail domains on a single IP. Somebody >> must use that feature (legitimately). > >You don't have a dynamic address, that's the point. That protects you from >ORBS. But if you lie about who you are then other sites will reject you for >it. If you have a legitimate MX that maps to your real IP address then >your OK. I guess it was the term "reverse dns lookup" that threw me. I thought that meant taking a numeric IP address and translating that to a name. That works for most dynamically-assigned IPs, although it will translate to something with the ISP's name on it, just like my static IP will. Doing a regular MX record lookup for validation is a different thing. It could potentially bite a company/ISP who uses a particular gateway for outgoing e-mail only -- their external DNS servers wouldn't mention it in MX records. --Keith Lewis klewis {at} mitre.org The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.