You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Jonathan Allen <jo...@barumtrading.co.uk> on 2007/07/03 17:26:53 UTC
Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
All,
I just tried to reply to a kind soul that had offered some help with the
3.2.1 root errors and got:
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<ad...@cobatco.com>
(reason: 554 <mailgate.barumtrading.co.uk[83.104.103.142]>: Client host rejected: Polish Spammer)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to mail.cobatco.com.:
>>> DATA
<<< 554 <mailgate.barumtrading.co.uk[83.104.103.142]>: Client host rejected: Polish Spammer
554 5.0.0 Service unavailable
<<< 554 Error: no valid recipients
I am neither a spammer, nor in Poland but a legitimate UK business with
the same IP address for some years. Where on earth did this response come
from ? It's a bit thick to get branded as a spammer when replying to
someone from this list!
Jonathan
Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Posted by Michał Jęczalik <mi...@jeczalik.com>.
On Tue, 3 Jul 2007, Jonathan Allen wrote:
> I just tried to reply to a kind soul that had offered some help with the
> 3.2.1 root errors and got:
>
> ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
> <ad...@cobatco.com>
> (reason: 554 <mailgate.barumtrading.co.uk[83.104.103.142]>: Client host rejected: Polish Spammer)
>
> ----- Transcript of session follows -----
> ... while talking to mail.cobatco.com.:
>>>> DATA
> <<< 554 <mailgate.barumtrading.co.uk[83.104.103.142]>: Client host rejected: Polish Spammer
> 554 5.0.0 Service unavailable
> <<< 554 Error: no valid recipients
>
> I am neither a spammer, nor in Poland but a legitimate UK business with
> the same IP address for some years. Where on earth did this response come
> from ? It's a bit thick to get branded as a spammer when replying to
> someone from this list!
Well, if somebody trusts in RBLs and rejects mail basing only upon RBL
queries... This IP is not in Poland, even RIPE whois database would
confirm this fact. Biggest Polish ADSL provider uses some of 83.x classes,
so that could be the problem, but it's no reason for some some
dumb soul to insert whole 83.x subnet into the RBL... Maybe he should put
0.0.0.0/0 and have spam problem 'solved'. :)
--
Michał Jęczalik, +48.603.64.62.97
INFONAUTIC, +48.33.487.69.04
Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Posted by Evan Platt <ev...@espphotography.com>.
At 09:04 AM 7/3/2007, Jonathan Allen wrote:
>Yes: admin@cobatco.com, to whom I was trying to respond. But I worded
>my question badly - what I meant was: why on earth should their machine
>think that I am a Polish spammer ? The IP address is in one of the
>static blocks administered by my (UK) ISP.
Perhaps they mean "Polish Spammer" not as you're a spammer in Poland,
but a spammer spamming in Polish (language)?
Think of it like if you spammed Mortgage crap, it might say you're a
"Mortgage Spammer".
Of couse, we're all guessing here.
Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Posted by SM <sm...@resistor.net>.
Hi Jonathan,
>Yes: admin@cobatco.com, to whom I was trying to respond. But I worded
>my question badly - what I meant was: why on earth should their machine
>think that I am a Polish spammer ? The IP address is in one of the
>static blocks administered by my (UK) ISP.
They may be using a "blacklist" to block SMTP connections from
Poland. That list has the wrong geographic information for your IP
address block.
Regards,
-sm
Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Posted by Jonathan Allen <jo...@barumtrading.co.uk>.
SM,
> > Where on earth did this response come from ?
>
> The response came from the mail server for cobatco.com. They have a
> user subscribed to this mailing list.
Yes: admin@cobatco.com, to whom I was trying to respond. But I worded
my question badly - what I meant was: why on earth should their machine
think that I am a Polish spammer ? The IP address is in one of the
static blocks administered by my (UK) ISP.
Jonathan
Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Posted by SM <sm...@resistor.net>.
At 08:26 03-07-2007, Jonathan Allen wrote:
>I am neither a spammer, nor in Poland but a legitimate UK business with
Are you absolutely sure you are not in Poland? :-) Antispam systems
can sometimes be geography-challenged.
>the same IP address for some years. Where on earth did this response come
>from ? It's a bit thick to get branded as a spammer when replying to
>someone from this list!
The response came from the mail server for cobatco.com. They have a
user subscribed to this mailing list.
Regards,
-sm
Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Posted by Craig Carriere <cc...@cobatco.com>.
Jonathan:
No need to apologize at all; you did me a favor by letting me know we
were still having these issues with our ISP's "anti-spam" methods. Will
get this sorted out one way or the other. Trying to keep your user's
mailboxes free of spam is work enough, but having to to battle with your
ISP over services you are suppose to be opted out of is another issue.
Thanks again and another apology to any on the list who were offended by
my ISP's response.
Jonathan Allen wrote:
> List and admin@cobatco.com,
>
>
>> First off sorry for the problem and to any from the country of Poland
>> that were offended by this.
>>
>
> I need to apologise to the nice chap at cobatco - I really didn't mean
> to cause you any embarassment on the public list, but I didn't think
> I could reach you any other way since your ISP is blocking my emails.
> Someone else suggested that I should have used the postmaster@cobatco.com
> address since by the RFC that isn't supposed to be filtered, but I had
> already posted by then.
>
>
>> Gives me something to address this afternoon since I thought I had this
>> solved ...
>>
>
> Hope you get it fixed ...
>
> Jonathan
>
>
Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
Posted by Jonathan Allen <jo...@barumtrading.co.uk>.
List and admin@cobatco.com,
> First off sorry for the problem and to any from the country of Poland
> that were offended by this.
I need to apologise to the nice chap at cobatco - I really didn't mean
to cause you any embarassment on the public list, but I didn't think
I could reach you any other way since your ISP is blocking my emails.
Someone else suggested that I should have used the postmaster@cobatco.com
address since by the RFC that isn't supposed to be filtered, but I had
already posted by then.
> Gives me something to address this afternoon since I thought I had this
> solved ...
Hope you get it fixed ...
Jonathan