On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Herrin" <bill@herrin.us> I'm not sure I follow your complaint here. Are you saying that Comcast or a Comcast customer in Washington state stripped the STARTTLS verb from the IPv4 port 587 SMTP submission connection between you and a third party?
Yup; that's what he's saying. This was in the technical press earlier this week -- or the end of last.
Hi Jay, Seems to me that if an ISP is altering the contents of its users' packets (not just blocking them, altering them) then that ISP should be named and shamed, if not worse. Unless the customer contracted for special account type where that was a desired and intended feature, such behavior is inexcusable. If it's a customer of that ISP, on the other hand, then it's just the normal idiocy and paranoia, no different than the retarded behavior by amateur sysadmins that block all ICMP because they don't want to be pinged (see PMTUD and its effects on TCP). Anyway, I was curious which accusation was being leveled. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/> May I solve your unusual networking challenges?