FreeLists / mlug / [mlug] Re: 50 max. emails to SBC/Yahoo email servers

[Dan Sikorski <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm sure it's all a matter of spam and viruses.  It makes perfect 
sense.  SBC doesn't want people spamming from their network, it's 
irresponsible, and it uses a lot of upstream bandwidth.  Microsoft 
probably doesn't want people using OE for spamming either, although if 
two out of three SBC techs told you that their servers don't allow it, 
i'd bet that OE isn't your problem.  Very few people actually send mail 
to that many reciepents (unless they have a virus, are spamming, or are 
sending some dumass forward to everyone they know.)  Don't complain, 
this is A Good Thing (TM).  I doubt that it's even a 
residential/commercial account matter.  If you need to send email like 
that, use your own mail server.  As far as i can tell (I'm a SBC DSL 
user) they don't block or limit any outgoing connections on port 25, (i 
send my outgoing mail through my own server, not theirs) and if you're 
just sending out one message to 200 reciepients, OE should send one 
message to the server, and the server should send out all of the copies 
from there.  If you have a mail server they can use, just set an account 
up for them (just don't set up an open relay).  Or for that matter, use 
a server to setup a mailing list.  There's plenty of good mailing list 
software options (majordomo and mailman are two examples that 
immediately come to mind) that are fairly simple, and would do 
everything that you would want.

    -Dan Sikorski

Tom Brown wrote:

>A client of mine (a church) is having difficulty broadcasting more than 50 
>emails at a time to church members. Their ISP is SBC/Yahoo DSL. Has anyone 
>else heard of this SBC/Yahoo 50-address limit to broadcasting email on 
>residential service? Two SBC techs have confirmed it exists.
>
>At least one SBC DSL tech claims the problem is MS Outlook. He says MS has 
>coded a limit on the number of broadcast addresses on each email. If an 
>organization has 200 members, they must break the membership into four 
>address groups of 50 each, then send the same message four times to avoid 
>the 50-address limit imposed by Outlook. He also said there may be a 200 
>message per day limit per residential account. I have experimented with 
>church's Outlook address list and know that the limit exists. But the 
>explanation of the problem seems thin to me.
>
>1. If MS in fact has limited Outlook users' ability to broadcast email, I 
>think we would have heard of it.
>2. Limiting the capability and flexibility of MS products is self-defeating 
>from a marketing viewpoint. MS' whole application history is feature creep 
>and bloated code.
>3. MS risks the ire of millions of users around the world. Users may not 
>understand how MS products allow security lapses, but they would surely 
>understand arbitrarily limiting users to 50 addresses per email message. 
>And react negatively.
>
>I suspect the problem resides at SBC/Yahoo. As an ISP they have an interest 
>in reducing email volume and spam. The marketing department may have set 
>residential use at 1-49 addresses per email and 50+ as business use, thus 
>requiring an "upgrade" to a business plan. Perhaps SBC also defines 50+ 
>addresses per email as spam.
>
>Tom 
>
>
>
>To post to the list send email to <mlug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>You may unsubscribe or change your list settings by going to the list website 
>at <http://www.freelists.org/webpage/mlug>
>  
>



To post to the list send email to <mlug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

You may unsubscribe or change your list settings by going to the list website 
at <http://www.freelists.org/webpage/mlug>