Port 25 inbound blocking

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Paula Keezer <paula_ke () yahoo com>
Date: February 24, 2009 1:44:58 PM EST
To: Jason_Livingood () cable comcast com
Cc: dave () farber net, ip () v2 listbox com
Subject: Port 25 inbound blocking

Dear Sir,

Please reconsider the decision to block inbound port 25.  I understand  
the spam fighting efforts for outbound port 25.  Creating alternate  
outbound paths for legitimate email users is fairly easy and does not  
stifle innovative uses of the web.  However, blocking inbound port 25  
is erroneous and will stifle innovation amongst legitimate users.  As  
more computers infiltrate the home and servers (media, game and  
otherwise) become powerful facilities in the home, it will become  
natural for users to make use of email and other communications ports  
to contact their home servers.

An example of such a use is a personal use photo gallery system I have  
on my media server.  I have several ways to load photos into my  
gallery which I enjoy on my locally connected hi def televisions (no  
need to plog up the net moving medium or low def pictures from flicker  
or other net based architectures, I have my own little personal cloud  
which is much faster thank you).  Recently I have built an email  
server that just recieves mail from my cell phone.  I send images  
through my cell phone ISP as mail attachements with a simple category  
message and my media server recieves the images and puts them into my  
gallery.  This is for my personal use and I believe it to be quite  
legitimate.

Due to Comcast port blocking of inbound port 25, my little gallery  
project no longer works.  Sadly, I believe I did some inovative work  
and am being stiffled by Comcast's inbound port 25 policy.

As my server does not send mail at all, there is no way it can become  
a port 25 zombi for spammers.  I have a legitimate use.  I am a long  
time paying customer of the Comcast ISP but find that the ISP in  
Comcast is becoming more of a CPS  (couch potatoe surfer).

Please reconsider your policy of blocking inbound port 25. This does  
not solve the spam problem (please continue to block outgoing port 25  
as this does solve the spam problem)  Forcing inovators such as my  
self to contract an outside email relay port hopping service is not a  
'fair use' strategy and not a customer centric focus.

Thank you for your time,

Paula Keezer
149 Nw 75th St
Seattle, WA, 98117




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com