31 May
2016
31 May
'16
6:04 p.m.
Is port 25 now being filtered within the tunnel network ?
Submission (587), ssh (22) and http (80) appear to be OK
(Internet -> 44 net)
... Niall
6:29 p.m.
On 2016-05-31 10:08 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:04:23AM -0700, Niall Parker wrote:
OK, thanks ... it may very well be my ISP, I wasn't expecting it on the
tunneled traffic though.
... Niall
Is port 25 now being filtered within the tunnel
network ?
No.
- Brian 
6:34 p.m.
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:29:29AM -0700, Niall Parker wrote:
OK, thanks ... it may very well be my ISP, I
wasn't expecting it on
the tunneled traffic though.
It's unlikely to be an ISP, as most of them don't do deep packet inspection
on IPIP traffic. I know I haven't added it to the filter list, and a
telnet n1uro.ampr.org 25
gets a connection, so as far as I can see it's still working.
- Brian
6:46 p.m.
On 2016-05-31 10:34 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:29:29AM -0700, Niall Parker wrote:
It turned out to be an outgoing filter on port 25 by Shaw ... they are
trying to reduce the traffic from hacked machines turned into spambots.
Whenever I tested port 25 from a machine on a Shaw network it failed but
was OK once I got out to UBC. Access to the Shaw mail server is still
allowed on port 25.
... Niall
OK, thanks ... it may very well be my ISP, I
wasn't expecting it on
the tunneled traffic though.
It's unlikely to be an ISP, as most of them don't do deep packet inspection
on IPIP traffic. I know I haven't added it to the filter list, and a
telnet n1uro.ampr.org 25
gets a connection, so as far as I can see it's still working.
- Brian
2893
days inactive
2893
days old
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Brian Kantor -
Niall Parker