|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
The Spamhaus folks are NOT good-guys | by archnerd | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
So you ARE a spammer, right? | by sysangel | 2006-09-18 07:25:43 |
|
SBC, now known as AT&T, is "cheap and dirty"? | by divinar | 2006-09-18 07:38:33 |
| Yup. SBC/AT&T is well known about that |
by sysangel |
2006-09-18 08:00:40 |
Google around in the news.admin.net-abuse.blocklisting UseNet group about the SBC/AT&T/Ameritech/Prodigy 'collective'. You will find some illuminating discussion about how SBC wants their customers to do the work about delisting, how AT&T doesn't 'work' with DNSBL operators, how SBC can't/won't segregate their dynamic residential clients from their business client IP space, won't properly provide rDNS for their business clients. Google about AT&T, Nevada Hosting, and "pink contracts"
The fact that you might not be seeing a huge discount might be a simple matter of lack of competition in your area. In places where there isn't good viable options about network connectivity, telco's like SBC don't discount. In areas with competition, suddenly their price is much cheaper than the responsible ISPs.
And I can vouch for that, first hand. One of our sales offices decided to get network connectivity on their own, rather than involve corporate because it would take too long. Both SBC and ComCast were solicited for quotes. SBC came back very cheap, since they knew they had competition. Once Comcast decided they won't run cable to that office part, suddenly SBC up'd their quote for services. (Yup, silly sales critter let their SBC rep know that Comcast bailed on their quote).
So, instead, the sales critters scaled back on their bandwidth requirements, settled on a low priced/lower bandwidth package from SBC.
Quirk about this. They can't always send email outbound without it getting rejected, nor can they receive email to their SBC accounts. Luckily for them, I can (and do) host their email, and provide forwarding services.
Once that 36 month term contract is up, that sales office will move from SBC. When I informed our SBC rep about that issues with sending/receiving email, his answer was basically, I don't care, I all ready have my commission on your contract. When I stated that I intend to leave after the term has been served, I received the same response. I don't care.
Since SBC doesn't care, I have additional work to perform to make up from their failed network management.
I am paying more, just not in the contract. But I am paying.
And apparently so did you. SBC/AT&T reimburse you for the time you spent getting your IP whitelisted? Will they, if it gets listed in the future? Have they fixed the issue, or do they expect you to fix 'the issue' when their spammers get your network block listed again? |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
The problem is, | by TheGM | 2006-09-18 10:00:24 |
|
Not entirely true | by azander | 2006-09-18 12:31:03 |
|
Care to cite a verifiable example? | by sysangel | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Nice try | by TheGM | 2006-09-18 15:06:33 |
|
Guess I'm a bit stressed about it | by TheGM | 2006-09-18 15:27:39 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
