fuffa@tesar.it wrote in news:1182951497.349291.114520
@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

Unless you're actually seeing mails that you send rejected due to this
APEWS listing (unlikely), then I'd not worry about it too much.

It is likely that your mail server isn't specifically listed, but rather
that APEWS has listed a wide swath of your provider's IP address space,
including your mail server's IP address. For more specific advice, you
would need to tell us the IP address of your mail server, though.

Cheers!
GRB

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:52:40 GMT eckie2399@gmail.com wrote:

| My company has been listed in APEWS under the addresses 64.1.16.20 and
| 64.1.16.3 as well as all in range.
|
| Entry matching your Query: E-216075
| 64.0.0.0/14
| ---------------------------------...

In <1182501701.963294.35630@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, on
06/22/2007
at 11:27 AM, Sypher gmail.com> said:

The Devil is in the details. Just because I use a DNSBL doesn't mean
that I accept every e-mail from a source listed in it, any more than
it means that I accept every e-mail from a source not listed in it.

Then who chose your provider?

Why bring up your situation if you know that it is irrelevant?

To whom? If I decline to go to a restaurant because of a bad revue,
why should I be concerned with the "damage" the restaurant reviewer
did? My sole concern is that the review be accurate. Similarly, if the
use of a DNSBL protects the admin and his users, then that's what's
important to him. If *his* users are unhappy then he'll change things.

In <1182460385.830463.301590@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, on
06/22/2007
at 03:39 PM, cp.bahamonde@gmail.com said:

More accurately, you're using an IP address in a listed block. You
need to discuss this with your provider.

Not unless you're FERROSTAAL Chile S.A.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, truly insane Spews puppet
<http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive
E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact
me. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

Hi there!

I'm here because we have mail blocked intermittently due to being
listed in APEWS. Only happens to two subscribers and all mails aren't
blocked and we don't see a pattern yet. If there was a link to another
newsgroup I'd be there instead of here.

I've read all the FAQ's, I'm not asking to be removed because I can't
ask. I'm not going to post the headers or anything else because we'll
be escalated and I guess "boycott listed" for life. It's a couple of
paragraphs down - but this is on topic for the newsgroup.

A word about us before I get to the meat. We are a small nonprofit
organization, part of a larger umbrella that addresses a certain
mental disorder that causes a lot of suffering and is fairly fatal.
Our organization lives by a vow of poverty, we try to raise just
enough money from our members to pay for our server and give away
books and other print literature. Our primary scope is to encourage
people to go get some darn face to face help before it's too late. We
have a few Mailman lists - two of which are a contact point for 24/7
live help and referral - these are human moderated - and we also have
a small chat room to do the same thing.

Carl Byington wrote:

Perhaps that is also how SenderBase sees (counts) it
(headers, not just the IP contacting a server) +/- their
unknown multiplier factoring.

--
E-Mail Sent to this address Anitech-Systems.com>
will be added to the BlackLists.

cp.bahamonde@gmail.com wrote in
news:1182460385.830463.301590@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

Elvey wrote:

I've talked to people from Ironport about seemingly strange behaviour of
the senderbase.org website (even more so since their *cough* redesign),
but they did not seem to interested. "It's a marketing tool."

The oddities I see are: completely wrong data returned (querying for
a.b.c.d/32 returns data for e.f.g.h/32), an almost ever-present
"Trustee" logo, no data returned when I'm pretty sure they should have
it (eg mailservers from large providers), data for a.b.c.d/32 is shown,
but blacklist results for e.f.g.h/32 are shown, and some minor glitches.

It almost looks as if the index in the database on the IP address field
got somehow corrupted. This greatly diminishes the value of
senderbase.org for my investigations (for use with dnswl.org). However,
the other "big" such system, trustedsource.org, is based on
significantly less data and is thus less useful to start with.

Entry matching your Query: E-216771
80.93.208.0-80.93.223.255
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASE: C-130
One or more bots in ASN / CIDR, unprofessional / negligent owner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Reason:
If your IP address is NOT listed but is part of a larger IP listing,
only the block owner can solve the problem, contact your ISP, see FAQ
16. Your ISP needs to action FAQ 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History:
Entry created 2007-06-20

i guess only our provider canresolve this problem or??

what can we do for getting out of the list??

someone help me please... :)

In article <1182330867.142944.301320@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, tguillemois@gmail.com says...