Exorcism D-day 29/05/2020 - or is it?

[Chris Pitt Lewis]

Back in 2016 I got myself a new domain and email address, but have kept
my demon address going through Namesco because I still get occasional
contacts through it, mostly as a result of old posts on genealogy sites.

So when I received the termination email earlier this month, I replied
pointing out that I did not need a new domain or address from them, and
only used their services because they were sold in 2016 as a way "to
keep your Demon email address". I had paid for 12 months on 29 August
last year, and would they please give me a refund for the 3 months
service I would not receive.

Here is an extract from the reply I received today, after a bit of toing
and froing:

".....we have just had news from Vodafone of an agreed extension until
1st September 2020, this is a couple of days after the expiry date of
your current package as such you can continue to receive emails right up
until your current expiry date of the package."

Not clear if this applies to everyone, or just to those who have made a
fuss.

--
Chris Pitt Lewis

[Neil]

That is a very very good point Chris. I do seriously wonder about the legality of the way this was sold to customers.We are all protected by the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations and things that are prohibited include serious omissions. Let's face it everyone who stayed did so because they wanted to keep the email address this was certainly the case with my relative who stayed with Demon precisely because of this. The omission was not telling us that the new company did not have full control of the domain name. Or more clearly put that there was a clear possibility that after as little as a year users would have to use a new email address anyway. I'm a computer nerd and I couldn't see the issue. Email systems aren't my particular thing but many of the remaining customers will be old demon DOMESTIC users. People who wanted email in their houses. I would encourage everyone to complain. At this time of crisis the last thing we want is problems with email not working!

[Cosma Papouis]

On Tuesday, 28 April 2020 13:52:58 UTC+1, Neil wrote:
> On Friday, 24 April 2020 20:02:42 UTC+1, Chris Pitt Lewis wrote:
prohibited include serious omissions. Let's face it everyone who stayed did so because they wanted to keep the email address

I stayed as I had a fixed IP address and changing it would put me to unnecessary agro (I am connected to 5 different networks.)

Once they said they were closing, and asked me to switch to Vodafone, I told them to take a hike and went looking for a replacement.

C.

[John]

In message <r7vd4h$k6p$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris Pitt Lewis
<ch...@cjpl.co.uk> writes

>
>Here is an extract from the reply I received today, after a bit of
>toing and froing:
>
>".....we have just had news from Vodafone of an agreed extension until
>1st September 2020, this is a couple of days after the expiry date of
>your current package as such you can continue to receive emails right
>up until your current expiry date of the package."
>
>Not clear if this applies to everyone, or just to those who have made a
>fuss.
>

I am having trouble getting my email address changed on some websites -
government ones seem to be the worst. You can't do it online and the
helpdesks are currently running a restricted or no service, so you can't
do it that way either. DVLA, for example, won't even let you submit a
query on their webform unless you are an HGV driver.

So I contacted Namesco who confirm that Vodafone have indeed extended
the deadline until 1st September. If you have already migrated, emails
to your old d.c.u address will keep arriving until then. So a bit of
breathing room to get the last handful of websites/mailing lists update.


--
John

[Andy]

In message <LXTLamAv...@nospam.demon.co.uk>, John
<jo...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote
[

>>
>I am having trouble getting my email address changed on some websites -
>government ones seem to be the worst. You can't do it online and the
>helpdesks are currently running a restricted or no service, so you
>can't do it that way either. DVLA, for example, won't even let you
>submit a query on their webform unless you are an HGV driver.
>
>So I contacted Namesco who confirm that Vodafone have indeed extended
>the deadline until 1st September. If you have already migrated, emails
>to your old d.c.u address will keep arriving until then. So a bit of
>breathing room to get the last handful of websites/mailing lists update.
>
>

I've encountered an analogous problem. You email from your new address,
but the "is this a genuine change if so reply accordingly" is sent to
your old address, which no longer works.
--
Andy Taylor [President, Treasurer & Editor of the Austrian Philatelic Society].
Visit www dot austrianphilately dot com

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 10:56:01, Andy <an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> wrote:
[]

>I've encountered an analogous problem. You email from your new address,
>but the "is this a genuine change if so reply accordingly" is sent to
>your old address, which no longer works.

That's why it's important to have an overlap, if you can. Looks like
ex-DCU users will have until 1 September.

Giving thought to it, I've decided that - counter-intuitively - your
change-my-address-in-your-records emails, at least to private contacts,
should be sent from your _old_ address, but say "please don't just click
reply, and change your records before you reply". That way, you can
detect the ones who say "sure, Andy, I'll update my records" - but
aren't doing so.

And probably you should have a line (about the change) in your .sig
_before_ the "-- " line, too.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"To YOU I'm an atheist; to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition." - Woody Allen

[Rick Hewett]

On Sat 02 May Andy wrote:
> I've encountered an analogous problem. You email from your new address,
> but the "is this a genuine change if so reply accordingly" is sent to
> your old address, which no longer works.

This kind of moronic institutional stupidity is, sadly, not un-common,
and not restricted to email addresses. I moved house in September 2018.
One of the big banks *still* insists on sending all post to the old
address, claiming they've not had the new one "confirmed", despite
having been sent appropriate utility bills etc...

I can sort-of see why they do it, but there seems to be a procedural
brick wall where, sometimes, a bit of common-sense flexibility is
necessary.

--
..Rick Hewett http://www.hewett.org/
Take the trash out to reply... ;)

[jo.wo...@gmail.com]

I got my demon email address in 1995. I'm outraged that Vodafone are shutting the demon name down. I wonder who will own the name eventually, and what they are paying for it. Grrrr.

[strathspey...@gmail.com]

Hopefully this means they'll carry on hosting demon websites too. I have a 301 redirect on mine to my new site, longer it runs the better. My Demon site's been running since 1996 with 1000s of links to it from forum posts and the like.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Tue, 5 May 2020 at 14:05:04, strathspey...@gmail.com wrote:
>Hopefully this means they'll carry on hosting demon websites too. I

What's "this"? (I've seen nothing to suggest any delay beyond September
1.)

[If by "they" you mean names.co.uk, they have no say in the matter; I
imagine they'd like to, but if Demon^wC&W^wThus^wVodafone don't let
them, they can't.]

>have a 301 redirect on mine to my new site, longer it runs the better.
>My Demon site's been running since 1996 with 1000s of links to it from
>forum posts and the like.
>

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

All change is not growth, as all movement is not forward. -Ellen Glasgow,
novelist (1874-1945)

[Peter Hill]

My renewal date was 27/09/2019

I would think that pretty much everyone has an expiry date around
September as it was dictated by the date Demon ceased to run an e-mail
server and everyone had to move to namesco.

[Martin Brown]

On 02/05/2020 14:15, Rick Hewett wrote:
> On Sat 02 May Andy wrote:
>> I've encountered an analogous problem. You email from your new address,
>> but the "is this a genuine change if so reply accordingly" is sent to
>> your old address, which no longer works.

You have to jump ship whilst you still have both if there is a
verification step or go through a human where you may still fail to
answer their security questions adequately.

Best unanswerable one I ever had was:
Q: Name the hotel where you stayed in Chester last year.
A: We haven't been to Chester for nearly a decade.

We did eventually convince them that we were genuine but it took 40
minutes more and endless additional security questions.

Checking the credit card statements later we established that the hotel
in question was round the corner from Durham cricket ground which is in
Chester *le street* and nothing to do with Cheshire where we once lived.

We have also looked up an acceptable answer to the other common security
question of "name a road that connects to your street" since they have
no names round here and Cxxx isn't acceptable and nor is A19.

> This kind of moronic institutional stupidity is, sadly, not un-common,
> and not restricted to email addresses. I moved house in September 2018.
> One of the big banks *still* insists on sending all post to the old
> address, claiming they've not had the new one "confirmed", despite
> having been sent appropriate utility bills etc...

There is another even more insidious mode of failure that I have seen
from both sides. If you subscribe the B*card branded card security
service and then move home you not only have to notify B*card but also
whoever they are using as their provider of the card security service.

I caught them sending a full list of all my active credit cards for
confirmation to my previous address long after I had moved and notified
B*card. Fortunately mail redirection got it to me. They cited DPA as the
reason they didn't tell the branded card security/fraud prevention side.

A previous tenant of my house had a card fraud alert and by chance his
surname was also Brown. It came to his old address because he hadn't
notified the provider of the B*card fraud detection service. I initially
assumed it was an identity theft against me since I was Mr Brown.

Banks claim this lack of data sharing is because of "data protection".

> I can sort-of see why they do it, but there seems to be a procedural
> brick wall where, sometimes, a bit of common-sense flexibility is
> necessary.

Common sense and droid scripts do not sit well together. The bank
security model nowadays they cannot even open the screen ofr your
account until the computer is satisfied that you really are you.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Rick Hewett]

On Thu 07 May Martin Brown wrote:
> Common sense and droid scripts do not sit well together. The bank
> security model nowadays they cannot even open the screen ofr your
> account until the computer is satisfied that you really are you.

Indeed. Moronic, but there you go. My mother managed to get confused
between her card PIN and her telephone banking PIN. They finally gave
up trying to use that for verification, but by the time they had, they
could easily have re-constructed the other PIN.

...and as for B'card... We changed our address with them. The next
statement came via the PO re-direct from the old address. The one after
that arrived a couple of months late, rubber-stamped "Mis-sent to
Falkland Islands". As it was obviously somewhat over-due, and as we'd
had trouble using the card, we phoned up to find out what was going on.
It turned out that the change-of-address instruction had been slightly
scrambled. We managed to determine what the complete outstanding balance
was and get things straightened out, but sure enough, a month or so
later, another would-have-been-over-due statement turned up, rubber-
stamped "Mis-sent to Falkland Islands". I gather, by the existance of
the rubber-stamp, that this sort of thing happens more often than one
might expect...

[Joe]

No, it needs to be thought through before implementation (e.g.
Microsoft asks for a second unrelated email address in some situations)
and above all, it needs to be *fully* *tested* before roll-out. Not
just a glance at the code and 'that'll work', but actual testing with
real email addresses or whatever other data is involved. So many
websites just don't work properly.

And while we're making wish lists, an actual listing on financial site
web pages of the JS URLs which are *needed* for transactions to work,
including those the browser hasn't yet seen. Practically every web
developer in the world assumes that everyone browses with all possible
JS enabled, and even free AV packages may install some JS blocking,
which may not be understood by the user.

--
Joe

[r...@amygdala.xyz]

We may have made a mistake in our choices but have moved to a .xyz domain. Unfortunately I'm now finding that email is frequently caught by spam filters and there are some services I use which are refusing to accept that <name>@<hostname>.xyz is a valid email address.

[Malcolm Loades]

On 25/05/2020 11:57, r...@amygdala.xyz wrote:
> We may have made a mistake in our choices but have moved to a .xyz domain. Unfortunately I'm now finding that email is frequently caught by spam filters and there are some services I use which are refusing to accept that <name>@<hostname>.xyz is a valid email address.
>

.xyz is not a good choice if I'm anything to go by. Several incoming
messages from .xyz domains a day but everyone one of them is spam. I
now bounce anything with a Reply To: of *.xyz saying "Your message has
been deleted without being seen. If this is an error please resend to
whitelist(current number)@***.net".

Should I ever come across a valid correspondent with an .xyz address
they will be permanently whitelisted.

Malcolm

PS Ditto, .fun .icu .party .id .top .bid and some others.

[Chris S]

Indeed! :-( OP should cut his losses and move again. What's wrong with
a ccTLD for example?

https://my.tsohost.com/cart.php?a=add&domain=register

Chris
--
Demon Customer 1993 - 2015; Gradwell Customer 2002 - 2016; now with Zen for connectivity and Tsohost
for web/email hosting (last Gradwell hosted domains migrated October 2016).

[Malcolm Loades]

On 25/05/2020 14:24, Chris S wrote:

> Demon Customer 1993 - 2015; Gradwell Customer 2002 - 2016; now with Zen for connectivity and Tsohost
> for web/email hosting (last Gradwell hosted domains migrated October 2016).

Same providers, same dates for me except I gave up on <g> in 2010 (you
hung on for another 6 years!). In 2010 Tsohost were the best hosting
company on the planet, just like the early <g> days you could always
talk to a Director, often they answered the support lines themselves
.... and then they sold out and it's been downhill all the way.

I'm currently moving all my domains to Krystal hosting, should be rid of
Tsohost by the end of the week. Hooray!

To get ever so slightly back on-topic the straw which broke this camel's
back I alluded to in my previous post - the sending of a bounce message
on a filter rule matching criteria eg From: *.xyx Do you have any such
filter rules? If so I suggest testing them by sending from a different
account such gmail etc. 2 weeks ago I did this and failed to receive
the bounce and called support, the agent then sent an email matching the
filter and agreed no bounce was received. The problem would be
escalated which in Tsohost terms means passing it from one support agent
to another support agent all asking the same questions. As with most
Tsohost tickets this will go on for 3-4 days until you demand that it
get's passed to a sysadmin. And that's where it's been for the past
week "We have no estimated time of resolution ......".

Malcolm

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 16:05:57, Malcolm Loades <dev...@loades.net>
wrote:

>On 25/05/2020 14:24, Chris S wrote:
>
>> Demon Customer 1993 - 2015; Gradwell Customer 2002 - 2016; now with
>>Zen for connectivity and Tsohost
>> for web/email hosting (last Gradwell hosted domains migrated October 2016).
>
>Same providers, same dates for me except I gave up on <g> in 2010 (you
>hung on for another 6 years!). In 2010 Tsohost were the best hosting
>company on the planet, just like the early <g> days you could always
>talk to a Director, often they answered the support lines themselves
>.... and then they sold out and it's been downhill all the way.

Much the same here: can't remember when I started with Demon, but I have
emails from 1995. Never actively terminated with Demon, but stopped
paying them at one point - in theory I could still have dialed-up, I
think (by that time I had no machine connected to a dial-up MoDem). I
never bought broadband from Demon (or any of their successors) - I've
always had that from PlusNet (always at this address, so 2007 or later).
I moved to namesco for the initial switch, as it seemed trivial; when -
I think it was a year or two later - they started making it difficult (I
think I either had to accept something to do with Office or switch to a
much higher price, possibly both) I bit the bullet and got my own
domain, with tsohost (probably from recommendation here) providing
registration (though making sure it's in my name) and email handling
(and a tiny website; I mainly use that in the way most people use
dropbox, i. e. as somewhere to put files for people to get).

So far, I've had little or no problem with tsohost - but then, I've had
very little reason to deal with them. I'd be interested to know what
problems you've had.

>
>I'm currently moving all my domains to Krystal hosting, should be rid
>of Tsohost by the end of the week. Hooray!

Are Krystal another small good startup, who are likely to go down in a
few years? Seems to be the problem with any service provider, be it ISP,
energy provider, ... )-:

>
>To get ever so slightly back on-topic the straw which broke this
>camel's back I alluded to in my previous post - the sending of a bounce
>message on a filter rule matching criteria eg From: *.xyx Do you have
>any such filter rules? If so I suggest testing them by sending from a
>different account such gmail etc. 2 weeks ago I did this and failed to
>receive the bounce and called support, the agent then sent an email
>matching the filter and agreed no bounce was received. The problem
>would be escalated which in Tsohost terms means passing it from one
>support agent to another support agent all asking the same questions.
>As with most Tsohost tickets this will go on for 3-4 days until you
>demand that it get's passed to a sysadmin. And that's where it's been
>for the past week "We have no estimated time of resolution ......".
>
>Malcolm

Hmm. I use PlusNet's outgoing email server, which has mostly given me
few problems - certainly (a) it doesn't mind where I'm connecting from,
and (b) doesn't mind that I'm sending emails that aren't from a plus.net
address [though very occasionally their support, when I've had some
other problem, have implied they don't "support" that (which has usually
disappeared when I get a different support person)]. The only real
problem is I occasionally get emails bounced for "spam or virus", when
they're neither (they're single emails to people I've emailed before or
since so not spam, and have no attachment so not virus". Subsequent
investigation has _eventually_ brought to light that their email
provider (they farm it out) actually examines content, and bounces if it
contains certain URLs [one of the shortening sites in particular]. I can
get round that by putting spaces in the URLs or zipping or one of many
other ways, if I have to.

If I'm understanding you correctly and it's bouncing of outgoing emails
that is your problem, do Zen have an outgoing one you could use, or
would they only do so if you were sending from a Zen address and/or via
a Zen-provided connection?

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush.
It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.
-Robert Maynard Hutchins, educator (1899-1977)

[Malcolm Loades]

On 25/05/2020 17:51, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>
> So far, I've had little or no problem with tsohost - but then, I've had
> very little reason to deal with them. I'd be interested to know what
> problems you've had.

All my tsohost problems relate to mail receiving. Recent problems
include random incoming mail not being scanned at all and the bounce
failure I've refered to. The biggest problem is not the individual
problems them selves but the absolute reluctance of Support to escalate
anything. They see it as a failure :-(

>
> Are Krystal another small good startup, who are likely to go down in a
> few years? Seems to be the problem with any service provider, be it ISP,
> energy provider, ... )-:

They've been around for 17 years, but crucially they are still owned by
the founder. It's when founders sell out or, as in the case Gradwell,
decide another sector is more profitable than hosting that things go
downhill.

>
> If I'm understanding you correctly and it's bouncing of outgoing emails
> that is your problem, do Zen have an outgoing one you could use, or
> would they only do so if you were sending from a Zen address and/or via
> a Zen-provided connection?
>

Yes, you misunderstand. I have my own mailserver and deliver outgoing
mail direct to the recipients mailserver. That works flawlessly.
However, I do receive mail through Tsohost. Using cPanel, filter rules
can be written against which incoming mail is checked. I have one group
which simply rejects any maill addressed to a localpart which I don't
want eg devnull@my domain etc. However, some filters may just catch the
rare genuine email and it it those filters which discard the message but
additionally cause a bounce message with a request to resend to another
address.

Malcolm

PS I've just realised that you may be using Tsohost cloud hosting not
cPanel hosting. In which case custom mail filters are not available to you.

[Malcolm Loades]

On 25/05/2020 17:51, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> Are Krystal another small good startup, who are likely to go down in a
> few years?

This may interest you https://krystal.uk/stats

Malcolm

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 20:37:24, Malcolm Loades <dev...@loades.net>
wrote:

>On 25/05/2020 17:51, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> So far, I've had little or no problem with tsohost - but then, I've
>>had
>> very little reason to deal with them. I'd be interested to know what
>> problems you've had.
>
>All my tsohost problems relate to mail receiving. Recent problems
>include random incoming mail not being scanned at all and the bounce

Ah. I've never got into mail scanning by provider.
[]

>> Are Krystal another small good startup, who are likely to go down in

[]

>They've been around for 17 years, but crucially they are still owned by
>the founder. It's when founders sell out or, as in the case Gradwell,
>decide another sector is more profitable than hosting that things go
>downhill.

Thanks. I'm marking your email as keep.
[]

>PS I've just realised that you may be using Tsohost cloud hosting not
>cPanel hosting. In which case custom mail filters are not available to
>you.

I _think_ I'm on cPanel. I get registration, email, and a (tiny - 500MB
I think) website, for twentysomething a year. cPanel feels faintly
familiar.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If you can't construct a coherent argument for the other side, you probably
don't understand your own opinion. - Scott Adams, 2015

[John Hall]

In message <hj2lee...@mid.individual.net>, Malcolm Loades
<dev...@loades.net> writes

krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.
--
John Hall
"It is a very sad thing that nowadays there is so little useless
information."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)

[John Hall]

In message <W2jgMPdw...@255soft.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6...@255soft.uk> writes
<snip>

>I _think_ I'm on cPanel. I get registration, email, and a (tiny - 500MB
>I think) website, for twentysomething a year. cPanel feels faintly
>familiar.

I think quite a lot of ISPs use it. I'm with Pickaweb for my domain
hosting and email (as that's who Gradwell passed me on to), and they use
it.

[David Rance]

On Tue, 26 May 2020 10:06:17 John Hall wrote:

>In message <hj2lee...@mid.individual.net>, Malcolm Loades
><dev...@loades.net> writes
>>On 25/05/2020 17:51, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>
>>> Are Krystal another small good startup, who are likely to go down in a
>>> few years?
>>
>>This may interest you https://krystal.uk/stats
>
>krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.

Domain.uk has been available for about five years now. I have
rancedotuk.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

[Adrian]

In message <WT0f2GCJwNzeFwIJ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes

>krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.

*.uk addresses have been available for a while, I have the .uk (rather
than .org.uk) version of my domain. It does look odd though, I suppose
we've been used to seeing the longer version for so long.

Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "bulleid" with "adrian" - all mail to bulleid is rejected
Sorry for the rigmarole, If I want spam, I'll go to the shops
Every time someone says "I don't believe in trolls", another one dies.

[Alan Woodford]

On Tue, 26 May 2020 11:08:58 +0100, Adrian <bul...@ku.gro.lioff>
wrote:

>In message <WT0f2GCJwNzeFwIJ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>>element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.
>
>*.uk addresses have been available for a while, I have the .uk (rather
>than .org.uk) version of my domain. It does look odd though, I suppose
>we've been used to seeing the longer version for so long.
>

I still occasionally have to explain a couple of times the mine is a
.uk, -not- a .co.uk :-)

People might get used to it eventually, but I'm not holding my
breath...

Alan Woodford

The Greying Lensman

[Martin Brown]

On 26/05/2020 11:08, Adrian wrote:
> In message <WT0f2GCJwNzeFwIJ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
> <john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>> krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>> element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.
>
> *.uk addresses have been available for a while, I have the .uk (rather
> than .org.uk) version of my domain.  It does look odd though, I suppose
> we've been used to seeing the longer version for so long.
>
> Adrian

Watch out for gotchas with free .uk domain for the first year when you
register a new .co.uk and then an unexpected charge the following year.
It pays to read the small print T&Cs very carefully.

BTW According to Namesco help the stay of exorcism delay is only until
14th June not September - help pages have latest updates.

https://www.names.co.uk/support/email/demon_email/2850-demon_email_questions_and_answers.html

It would be nice to know which version of reality is correct.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 11:24:01, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 26/05/2020 11:08, Adrian wrote:
>> In message <WT0f2GCJwNzeFwIJ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
>><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>> krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>>>element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.
>> *.uk addresses have been available for a while, I have the .uk
>>(rather than .org.uk) version of my domain.  It does look odd though,
>>I suppose we've been used to seeing the longer version for so long.
>> Adrian
>

Yes, I went for a just .uk as I'm not a company - but didn't go for a
.me.uk as I might in theory want to trade sometime (though it's
unlikely).

>
>Watch out for gotchas with free .uk domain for the first year when you
>register a new .co.uk and then an unexpected charge the following year.
>It pays to read the small print T&Cs very carefully.

Indeed. I notice Namesco are "giving" free first year for three types -
I forget which, I think they included .uk and .co.uk though.

>
>BTW According to Namesco help the stay of exorcism delay is only until
>14th June not September - help pages have latest updates.
>
>https://www.names.co.uk/support/email/demon_email/2850-demon_email_quest
>ions_and_answers.html
>
>It would be nice to know which version of reality is correct.
>

Are you sure that's latest, or just hasn't been updated? AIUI, it was
originally going to be earlier, but Demon/Vodafone finally relented - a
bit. (Though probably best to assume earlier anyway: it encourages
digital extraction rather than putting-off.)

P. S.: Turnpike says the first of the two apparent spaces after
"Domain." in the first paragraph isn't kosher. I know all about
character sets, encodings, etc., but I still don't see the advantage of
inserting the extra bit (or whatever).

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

gazing at someone in distress is prurient and rude.
- Alison Graham, RT 2015/6/20-26

[Chris S]

On Mon, 25 May 2020 16:05:57 +0100, Malcolm Loades
<dev...@loades.net> wrote:

>On 25/05/2020 14:24, Chris S wrote:
>
>> Demon Customer 1993 - 2015; Gradwell Customer 2002 - 2016; now with Zen for connectivity and Tsohost
>> for web/email hosting (last Gradwell hosted domains migrated October 2016).
>
>Same providers, same dates for me except I gave up on <g> in 2010 (you
>hung on for another 6 years!). In 2010 Tsohost were the best hosting

Another time, another life! :-) AFAIR, I thought I had jumped ship
fairly early on but it would seem not.

>company on the planet, just like the early <g> days you could always
>talk to a Director, often they answered the support lines themselves
>.... and then they sold out and it's been downhill all the way.

Not sure how my timeline correlates with your assessment of Tsohost,
but they seemed pretty much on the ball when I migrated to them.
However, I would agree that they are dropping that ball with
increasing frequency. Too many network issues for my liking. No
immediate plans to move though.

>I'm currently moving all my domains to Krystal hosting, should be rid of
>Tsohost by the end of the week. Hooray!

Made a note of the name!

>To get ever so slightly back on-topic the straw which broke this camel's
>back I alluded to in my previous post - the sending of a bounce message
>on a filter rule matching criteria eg From: *.xyx Do you have any such
>filter rules? If so I suggest testing them by sending from a different

Many moons ago I used to spend a lot of effort in managing spam, not
in the least because there were times I would get several thousand a
day. That really isn't a problem any more and I stopped bouncing mail
a long time ago. I just run it all through MailwasherPro and visually
scan it. Doesn't take long and having used bespoke email addresses
since early Demon times, it's easy to spot as they typically arrive in
droves. They just get deleted.

I do have 'global' filter rules of course for 'internal' routing mail,
as opposed to externally bouncing it. I also have a very slight
suspicion that the odd mail item may go AWOL but do not have any
definitive proof of that. Perhaps I do need to do some tests.

>account such gmail etc. 2 weeks ago I did this and failed to receive
>the bounce and called support, the agent then sent an email matching the
>filter and agreed no bounce was received. The problem would be
>escalated which in Tsohost terms means passing it from one support agent
>to another support agent all asking the same questions. As with most
>Tsohost tickets this will go on for 3-4 days until you demand that it
>get's passed to a sysadmin. And that's where it's been for the past
>week "We have no estimated time of resolution ......".

I don't recall having any ticket 'escallation issues' but my tickets
tend to be just 'shots across the bow' i.e. letting them know I'm
aware of a network issue even though it's not listed on the status
page!

Chris
--

[Andy]

In message <jN8SjbG6qOzeFw$z...@ku.gro.lloiff>, Adrian
<bul...@ku.gro.lioff> wrote

>In message <WT0f2GCJwNzeFwIJ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>>element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.
>
>*.uk addresses have been available for a while, I have the .uk (rather
>than .org.uk) version of my domain. It does look odd though, I suppose
>we've been used to seeing the longer version for so long.
>

There's also %word%.co which causes confusion when people think it's a
typo and 'correct' it to %word%.com which in most cases exists and gets
annoyed.
--
Andy Taylor [President, Treasurer & Editor of the Austrian Philatelic Society].
Visit www dot austrianphilately dot com

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 19:40:58, Andy <an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <jN8SjbG6qOzeFw$z...@ku.gro.lloiff>, Adrian
><bul...@ku.gro.lioff> wrote
>>In message <WT0f2GCJwNzeFwIJ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
>><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>>krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>>>element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.
>>
>>*.uk addresses have been available for a while, I have the .uk (rather
>>than .org.uk) version of my domain. It does look odd though, I
>>suppose we've been used to seeing the longer version for so long.
>>
>There's also %word%.co which causes confusion when people think it's a
>typo and 'correct' it to %word%.com which in most cases exists and gets
>annoyed.

Yes, I came across one of those recently. Is .co not - at least
nominally - Colombia?

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

... there were parts of Roman York that appear to be more ethnically mixed
than parts of modern York. - David Olusoga, RT 2016/11/5-11

[Ian Jackson]

In message <Da6lX96X...@255soft.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6...@255soft.uk> writes

>On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 19:40:58, Andy <an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <jN8SjbG6qOzeFw$z...@ku.gro.lloiff>, Adrian
>><bul...@ku.gro.lioff> wrote
>>>In message <WT0f2GCJwNzeFwIJ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
>>><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>>>krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>>>>element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.
>>>
>>>*.uk addresses have been available for a while, I have the .uk
>>>(rather than .org.uk) version of my domain. It does look odd though,
>>>I suppose we've been used to seeing the longer version for so long.
>>>
>>There's also %word%.co which causes confusion when people think it's a
>>typo and 'correct' it to %word%.com which in most cases exists and
>>gets annoyed.
>Yes, I came across one of those recently. Is .co not - at least
>nominally - Colombia?

When I left Demon (or was it Demon left me?) in 2016, I got two email
domains via Namesco. One was a .uk. IIRC, when I tried to use it via
Thunderbird it wasn't recognised as a valid address. [Or something like
that.] When it came to renewal time, I just let it die.
--
Ian

[Charles Ellson]

On Tue, 26 May 2020 21:11:03 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:

>On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 19:40:58, Andy <an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <jN8SjbG6qOzeFw$z...@ku.gro.lloiff>, Adrian
>><bul...@ku.gro.lioff> wrote
>>>In message <WT0f2GCJwNzeFwIJ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
>>><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>>>krystal.uk seems a rather strange address. It looks like there's an
>>>>element missing, but clicking on your link shows that it works.
>>>
>>>*.uk addresses have been available for a while, I have the .uk (rather
>>>than .org.uk) version of my domain. It does look odd though, I
>>>suppose we've been used to seeing the longer version for so long.
>>>
>>There's also %word%.co which causes confusion when people think it's a
>>typo and 'correct' it to %word%.com which in most cases exists and gets
>>annoyed.
>Yes, I came across one of those recently. Is .co not - at least
>nominally - Colombia?
>

Not just nominally, see e.g. www.gov.co but according to Wonkypaedia
some one letter bits were auctioned off a few years ago to Twitter,
Amazon etc.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 08:54:23, Charles Ellson <ce1...@yahoo.ca>

wrote:
>On Tue, 26 May 2020 21:11:03 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 19:40:58, Andy <an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> wrote:

[]

>>>There's also %word%.co which causes confusion when people think it's a
>>>typo and 'correct' it to %word%.com which in most cases exists and gets
>>>annoyed.
>>Yes, I came across one of those recently. Is .co not - at least
>>nominally - Colombia?
>>
>Not just nominally, see e.g. www.gov.co but according to Wonkypaedia
>some one letter bits were auctioned off a few years ago to Twitter,
>Amazon etc.

Presumably, therefore, Colombia gets some control? (I believe a
significant proportion of the income of Tuvalu comes from administration
of their allocation! Though it would be less for co.)

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

science is not intended to be foolproof. Science is about crawling toward the
truth over time. - Scott Adams, 2015-2-2

[Charles Ellson]

On Wed, 27 May 2020 11:09:43 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"

<G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:

>On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 08:54:23, Charles Ellson <ce1...@yahoo.ca>
>wrote:
>>On Tue, 26 May 2020 21:11:03 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>><G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 19:40:58, Andy <an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> wrote:
>[]
>>>>There's also %word%.co which causes confusion when people think it's a
>>>>typo and 'correct' it to %word%.com which in most cases exists and gets
>>>>annoyed.
>>>Yes, I came across one of those recently. Is .co not - at least
>>>nominally - Colombia?
>>>
>>Not just nominally, see e.g. www.gov.co but according to Wonkypaedia
>>some one letter bits were auctioned off a few years ago to Twitter,
>>Amazon etc.
>
>Presumably, therefore, Colombia gets some control? (I believe a
>significant proportion of the income of Tuvalu comes from administration
>of their allocation! Though it would be less for co.)
>

Looks like a Colombian company (.CO Internet SAS) owned by Neustar in
the USA which is owned by Golden Gate Capital in San Francisco.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.co

[Martin Brown]

On 24/04/2020 20:02, Chris Pitt Lewis wrote:
>
[snip]

> Here is an extract from the reply I received today, after a bit of toing
> and froing:
>
> ".....we have just had news from Vodafone of an agreed extension until
> 1st September 2020, this is a couple of days after the expiry date of
> your current package as such you can continue to receive emails right up
> until your current expiry date of the package."
>
> Not clear if this applies to everyone, or just to those who have made a
> fuss.

I just got an email saying now extended to 28/7/2020

It has various "helpful" automated boilerplate suggestions for domain
names I might like to register - unfortunately someone already has them!

End of an era...

I expect there might perhaps be one more stay of execution before we all
vanish suddenly with just a puff of acrid black demonic smoke remaining.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Andy]

In message <rbaclv$6lq$2...@gioia.aioe.org>, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote
[

>I expect there might perhaps be one more stay of execution before we
>all vanish suddenly with just a puff of acrid black demonic smoke
>remaining.
>

They hunted till darkness came on, but they found
Not a button, or feather, or mark,
By which they could tell that they stood on the ground
Where the Baker had met with the Snark.

In the midst of the word he was trying to say,
In the midst of his laughter and glee,
He had softly and suddenly vanished away-
For the Snark was a Boojum, you see.

[Tim Lamb]

In message <rbaclv$6lq$2...@gioia.aioe.org>, Martin Brown

<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> writes

:-)

The only positive element I could see in the last *sales* offering is
that historic mails will remain accessible. (my translation of what the
mail said).

Is there any reason why such mail can't be made accessible to an
existing, in use, mail address hosted by Namesco? I took one out in 2016
when this first kicked off but continued with .demon as it failed to die
as threatened.
>

--
Tim Lamb

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 17:48:05, Tim Lamb <t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <rbaclv$6lq$2...@gioia.aioe.org>, Martin Brown
><'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> writes
>>On 24/04/2020 20:02, Chris Pitt Lewis wrote:
>>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>> Here is an extract from the reply I received today, after a bit of
>>>toing and froing:
>>> ".....we have just had news from Vodafone of an agreed extension
>>>until 1st September 2020, this is a couple of days after the expiry
>>>date of your current package as such you can continue to receive
>>>emails right up until your current expiry date of the package."
>>> Not clear if this applies to everyone, or just to those who have
>>>made a fuss.
>>
>>I just got an email saying now extended to 28/7/2020

From helping (?) someone go through this (Eileen Comm [no relation to
dot!], whom some may remember from DIST), I gather that the 1st
September is a Vodafone decision, with the /7/28 decision a Namesco one
(probably to give a bit of leeway to try to stop people dragging their
feet).

>>
>>It has various "helpful" automated boilerplate suggestions for domain
>>names I might like to register - unfortunately someone already has them!
>>
>>End of an era...
>>
>>I expect there might perhaps be one more stay of execution before we
>>all vanish suddenly with just a puff of acrid black demonic smoke
>>remaining.
>
>:-)
>
>The only positive element I could see in the last *sales* offering is
>that historic mails will remain accessible. (my translation of what the
>mail said).

Yes, it does need translating, doesn't it! From what I've found with
Eileen, she now receives both emails to her new address (she's gone for
a .net one) and her old Demon one. In her case, as she uses POP,
"historic" emails are not of concern (they're on her computer); I
presume "accessible" is for IMAP users. _New_ emails to the old
addresses will, I presume, not even reach Namesco after /9/1. (Anyone
know what sort of bounce - if any - senders will receive? I imagine that
will vary by the sender's ISP's policies, with the most likely being no
bounce or other indication at all.)

>
>Is there any reason why such mail can't be made accessible to an
>existing, in use, mail address hosted by Namesco? I took one out in
>2016 when this first kicked off but continued with .demon as it failed
>to die as threatened.
>>

If you mean historical emails, then I _think_ that's what they're
saying; if you mean why can't new emails to the old address do that,
then I think it's because the old destination(s) will disappear, and
there's nothing Namesco can do about that as they don't own the domain.

>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

A biochemist walks into a student bar and says to the barman: "I'd like a pint
of adenosine triphosphate, please." "Certainly," says the barman, "that'll be
ATP." (Quoted in) The Independent, 2013-7-13

[Tim Lamb]

In message <o9Kfex2C...@255soft.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6...@255soft.uk> writes

>On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 17:48:05, Tim Lamb <t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>In message <rbaclv$6lq$2...@gioia.aioe.org>, Martin Brown
>>

>>The only positive element I could see in the last *sales* offering is
>>that historic mails will remain accessible. (my translation of what
>>the mail said).
>
>Yes, it does need translating, doesn't it! From what I've found with
>Eileen, she now receives both emails to her new address (she's gone for
>a .net one) and her old Demon one. In her case, as she uses POP,
>"historic" emails are not of concern (they're on her computer); I
>presume "accessible" is for IMAP users. _New_ emails to the old
>addresses will, I presume, not even reach Namesco after /9/1. (Anyone
>know what sort of bounce - if any - senders will receive? I imagine
>that will vary by the sender's ISP's policies, with the most likely
>being no bounce or other indication at all.)
>>
>>Is there any reason why such mail can't be made accessible to an
>>existing, in use, mail address hosted by Namesco? I took one out in
>>2016 when this first kicked off but continued with .demon as it failed
>>to die as threatened.
>>>
>If you mean historical emails, then I _think_ that's what they're
>saying; if you mean why can't new emails to the old address do that,
>then I think it's because the old destination(s) will disappear, and
>there's nothing Namesco can do about that as they don't own the domain.

Yes. Historical. To be frank, I don't know if collection is POP or IMAP!

I have been migrating the .demon mail for some time (mailing list users
seem impermeable to new address messages:-( and have set up a *change of
address* response message in Thunderbird. It can get into a loop! with
auto responders.
>>

--
Tim Lamb

[Tim Lamb]

In message <7GRjEFU9$p2e...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>, Tim Lamb
<t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> writes

As your were! T'bird tells me all 3 mail services are POP. So they are
stored on my hard drive?

Why are Namesco charging me for 2 g of storage?

--
Tim Lamb

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 20:41:49, Tim Lamb <t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>

(See next post.)

>
>I have been migrating the .demon mail for some time (mailing list users
>seem impermeable to new address messages:-(

I thought the whole point of a mailing list was that users just "posted"
by sending an email to the listserver address, which then got forwarded
to all users. (Some news/email _clients_ can make mailing lists look
like newsgroups; Turnpike can, I don't know if Thunderbird can.)

If you mean some users respond to your old email shown on old postings
when they try to send you a _private_ message rather than posting via
the mailing list, then there's nothing you can do about that - any more
than you can do anything about people who reply to old emails of yours
they have. [A depressing number of people don't use an address book, but
instead, when they want to email you, find an old email from you and
reply to it.]

If you mean the mailing list _administrator_ - which may (I think most
are) be automated, then yes, they sometimes _can_ be unresponsive; at
worst, just sign up to them anew with the new email, and unsubscribe the
old.

> and have set up a *change of address* response message in Thunderbird.
>It can get into a loop! with auto responders.
>>>
>
--

J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Being punctual makes people think you have nothing to do.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 21:20:12, Tim Lamb <t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <7GRjEFU9$p2e...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>, Tim Lamb
><t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> writes

[]

>>Yes. Historical. To be frank, I don't know if collection is POP or IMAP!

[]

>As your were! T'bird tells me all 3 mail services are POP. So they are
>stored on my hard drive?

Well, I simplified _slightly_: I _think_ all POP systems do download the
emails, but there's usually a setting "delete emails from server once
downloaded"; I think most email clients do have that setting by default
when using POP. (When POP was devised, storage space on servers was a
concern. Many ISPs used to delete uncollected [or collected but _not_
deleted from the server] emails a set time after they arrived; 30 days
for Demon, IIRR. In some cases, they bounced them back to the sender, or
at least sent the sender a note to say they'd not been collected; can't
remember if Demon did.])

You can easily find out; disconnect your internet connection (unplug
your ethernet cable if using one, disconnect your wifi, or turn off your
router), and see if you can access an old email; if you can, it's on
your hard drive (-:.

>
>Why are Namesco charging me for 2 g of storage?
>

Even if you're using POP with the default
delete-from-server-on-collection, they still have to store your emails
until you _do_ collect them - while your computer's off, or you're on
holiday, or whatever. These days, it doesn't take _that_ many emails -
containing oversized snaps of holiday/grandchildren etc., untrimmed
conversations, video/audio clips - to get to 2G. Assuming that's what
the storage is for; it might be for your website, if you have one. (Some
ISPs - dunno about Namesco - offer space that can be used for both,
especially at the cheaper end of their offerings; put a few large clips
on your website and you have less space in which incoming email can be
stored, or vice versa. The arrangement I have with TSOhost is like that
- only 500M, IIRR; I have them autoforward all my mail to PlusNet, so
that isn't a problem. [My website is tiny and ancient - I mainly just
use it like many use DropBox.]) I would imagine Namesco have told you
somewhere what the 2G is for. (Could also be a backup offering.)

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

[Tim Lamb]

In message <4ZDbH7Ek...@255soft.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6...@255soft.uk> writes

>On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 21:20:12, Tim Lamb <t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>In message <7GRjEFU9$p2e...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>, Tim Lamb
>><t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> writes
>[]
>>>Yes. Historical. To be frank, I don't know if collection is POP or IMAP!
>[]
>>As your were! T'bird tells me all 3 mail services are POP. So they are
>>stored on my hard drive?
>
>Well, I simplified _slightly_: I _think_ all POP systems do download
>the emails, but there's usually a setting "delete emails from server
>once downloaded"; I think most email clients do have that setting by
>default when using POP. (When POP was devised, storage space on servers
>was a concern. Many ISPs used to delete uncollected [or collected but
>_not_ deleted from the server] emails a set time after they arrived; 30
>days for Demon, IIRR. In some cases, they bounced them back to the
>sender, or at least sent the sender a note to say they'd not been
>collected; can't remember if Demon did.])
>
>You can easily find out; disconnect your internet connection (unplug
>your ethernet cable if using one, disconnect your wifi, or turn off
>your router), and see if you can access an old email; if you can, it's
>on your hard drive (-:.

OK John. They are on the hard drive. Good to know as there is lots of
recent house move stuff I haven't bothered to print.

>>
>>Why are Namesco charging me for 2 g of storage?
>>
>Even if you're using POP with the default
>delete-from-server-on-collection, they still have to store your emails
>until you _do_ collect them - while your computer's off, or you're on
>holiday, or whatever. These days, it doesn't take _that_ many emails -
>containing oversized snaps of holiday/grandchildren etc., untrimmed
>conversations, video/audio clips - to get to 2G. Assuming that's what
>the storage is for; it might be for your website, if you have one.
>(Some ISPs - dunno about Namesco - offer space that can be used for
>both, especially at the cheaper end of their offerings; put a few large
>clips on your website and you have less space in which incoming email
>can be stored, or vice versa. The arrangement I have with TSOhost is
>like that - only 500M, IIRR; I have them autoforward all my mail to
>PlusNet, so that isn't a problem. [My website is tiny and ancient - I
>mainly just use it like many use DropBox.]) I would imagine Namesco
>have told you somewhere what the 2G is for. (Could also be a backup offering.)

OK. I have a support ticket raised on the demon move and can ask if it
is used. I like your *drop box* idea and may take that further.

Thanks.

--
Tim Lamb

[Richard_CC]

On most POP clients in account settings you can change the default and
tell it what to do when you have downloaded the emails. Mine is set to
'leave on server' so I can access them in other ways and on other
devices. Other possible settings are thing like delete, delete after n
days and so on. I always use POP3 to one machine so I have a real
forever copy in case the provider withdraws the service or otherwise
screws up Every so often I log on to the server and have a clean up of
the inbox and while I am at it I do an external drive archive copy of
what's on my machine (I use Thunderbird now).

It's fully compliant with Schofield's law (now sadly deceased) - If data
doesn't exist in 3 places, it doesn't exist.

So, it's perfectly possible to use POP3 and still be using the
provider's storage.

[John Hall]

In message <rbnir6$gjj$1...@dont-email.me>, Richard_CC
<ric...@nospam.rjcresources.co.uk> writes

>On most POP clients in account settings you can change the default and
>tell it what to do when you have downloaded the emails. Mine is set to
>'leave on server' so I can access them in other ways and on other
>devices. Other possible settings are thing like delete, delete after n
>days and so on. I always use POP3 to one machine so I have a real
>forever copy in case the provider withdraws the service or otherwise
>screws up Every so often I log on to the server and have a clean up of
>the inbox and while I am at it I do an external drive archive copy of
>what's on my machine (I use Thunderbird now).
>
>It's fully compliant with Schofield's law (now sadly deceased) - If
>data doesn't exist in 3 places, it doesn't exist.
>
>So, it's perfectly possible to use POP3 and still be using the
>provider's storage.

Also with some servers, even if you have the setting to delete after
POP3 download it doesn't actually delete the mail immediately but
instead moves it to some sort of "waste-bin" folder, where it's retained
for typically 30 days before being finally deleted (and in some cases
not until you log onto the webmail app and tell it to delete the
waste-bin contents).

[Tim Lamb]

In message <rbnir6$gjj$1...@dont-email.me>, Richard_CC
<ric...@nospam.rjcresources.co.uk> writes

>On 06/06/2020 10:44, Tim Lamb wrote:

Snip

>> OK. I have a support ticket raised on the demon move and can ask if
>>it is used. I like your *drop box* idea and may take that further.
>> Thanks.
>>
>On most POP clients in account settings you can change the default and
>tell it what to do when you have downloaded the emails. Mine is set to
>'leave on server' so I can access them in other ways and on other
>devices. Other possible settings are thing like delete, delete after n
>days and so on. I always use POP3 to one machine so I have a real
>forever copy in case the provider withdraws the service or otherwise
>screws up Every so often I log on to the server and have a clean up of
>the inbox and while I am at it I do an external drive archive copy of
>what's on my machine (I use Thunderbird now).
>
>It's fully compliant with Schofield's law (now sadly deceased) - If
>data doesn't exist in 3 places, it doesn't exist.
>
>So, it's perfectly possible to use POP3 and still be using the
>provider's storage.

Following the reminder, I have set mine to delete after 30 days.

As John says, my historic mails are saved on the desktop as they are
still accessible with the Internet connection disabled.

I'm well short of Schofield as my external backup is housed in the same
office:-(

--
Tim Lamb

[Richard_CC]

And I'm sure we all remember the out-of-the blue Demon edict that
everything would go after 30 days regardless of what the user did. Even
if you used webmail to put things in subfolders. Completely killed the
IMAP concept. That was just before a 5 week trip to Canada for me, so I
took a laptop and painfully POPped a couple of times when I found free
hotel wifi.

And my old webpages are still there, they gave us short notice about the
move of hosting to Namesco, next day I deleted all the content but they
had already sent the test data (i.e. real pages) to Namesco before they
told us. As I never had a Namesco account and my address changed, they
wouldn't recognise me and raise a ticket so its still there. I was
hopeful of a 29 May end, but looks like it might outlive me.

Although some might mourn their passing, they did some pretty rubbish
stuff towards the long drawn out end.

Grrrr.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 10:46:20, Richard_CC
<ric...@nospam.rjcresources.co.uk> wrote:
[]

>And my old webpages are still there, they gave us short notice about
>the move of hosting to Namesco, next day I deleted all the content but
>they had already sent the test data (i.e. real pages) to Namesco before
>they told us. As I never had a Namesco account and my address changed,
>they wouldn't recognise me and raise a ticket so its still there. I
>was hopeful of a 29 May end, but looks like it might outlive me.

I think they'll probably disappear at last on 1 September.

>
>Although some might mourn their passing, they did some pretty rubbish
>stuff towards the long drawn out end.

Indeed. And Names.co.uk weren't great initially, though seem to have
been a lot better over this (though not perfect - you have to get
someone who knows about it).
>
>Grrrr.
>
Agreed, but it doesn't get us anywhere (-:

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Thay have a saying for it: /Geiz ist geil/, which roughly translates as, "It's
sexy to be stingly". - Joe Fattorini, RT insert 2016/9/10-16

[markr...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, 9 June 2020 10:46:22 UTC+1, Richard_CC wrote:

> And my old webpages are still there, they gave us short notice about the
> move of hosting to Namesco, next day I deleted all the content but they
> had already sent the test data (i.e. real pages) to Namesco before they
> told us. As I never had a Namesco account and my address changed, they
> wouldn't recognise me and raise a ticket so its still there. I was
> hopeful of a 29 May end, but looks like it might outlive me.

Mine are still there, I never had any notice from Vodafone about them being moved, or how to get any kind of FTP access. I only realised when I tried to FTP to the old Demon homepages server and it didn't work. I've been trying to find out from namesco today how to get access but they told me they have no web page data for my domain at all. So I sent them a link to one of my pages that is being served by them and now they've gone quiet on me.

Most of the stuff on there is 20 or more years old and was just added at random times like a scrapbook, but I can't remember half of the filenames so no way to get it back without being able to FTP (or SCP or whatever).

Mark

[Richard_CC]

On 09/06/2020 14:06, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

>>
> Agreed, but it doesn't get us anywhere (-:

Nowhere practical I agree. Perhaps though it's useful to remember the
post C&W/Vodafone bad stuff as well as the earlier Demon excellence,
makes us less likely to mourn the final passing.

[Joe]

Me too, my old website is still there, thirteen years out of date.
Fortunately, I haven't used the Demon domain name in over twenty years,
so I don't get people looking for what I used to do then.

--
Joe

[John Hall]

In message <20200609211...@jresid.jretrading.com>, Joe
<j...@jretrading.com> writes

I seem to be the only one whose website /did/ get taken down. When I put
in www.jhall.demon.co.uk I get a names.co.uk branded page saying:

Don’t let this space go to waste
Make jhall.demon.co.uk work hard for you
Create your online
presence today
Set up your FREE one page website simply activate and add your details

Plus an alternative option to pay them to set up a "proper" website.

[David Rance]

No, mine was taken down after I rang them and asked the young lady to
remove it, PLEASE! She did so immediately. The only way I can find my
old pages is to use the wayback machine.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

[Andy]

In message <ZLwq6sC56+3eFwYo@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote
[]

>I seem to be the only one whose website /did/ get taken down. When I
>put in www.jhall.demon.co.uk I get a names.co.uk branded page saying:
>
>Don’t let this space go to waste
>Make jhall.demon.co.uk work hard for you
>Create your online
>presence today
>Set up your FREE one page website simply activate and add your details
>

http://www.kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk/ got the same treatment.

[Andy]

In message <rbnir6$gjj$1...@dont-email.me>, Richard_CC

<ric...@nospam.rjcresources.co.uk> wrote
[]

>It's fully compliant with Schofield's law (now sadly deceased) - If
>data doesn't exist in 3 places, it doesn't exist.
>

Ah, but there's Taylor's corollary: all copies of a piece of data will
be subtly different.

[Andy]

In message <ucIGSbPd...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>, Tim Lamb
<t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> wrote
[]

>
>I'm well short of Schofield as my external backup is housed in the same
>office:-(
>

I think you (and me, and everybody) need to do a risk assessment. What
risks do you want to worry about, what's the chance of them happening,
what's the consequences both personally and financially, what - if
anything - can you do about it. For example:

Loss of all data because of local machine failure, malware attack,
theft, your ISP suddenly ceases trading, etc
- maybe once every 10 years
- lose e-contact details for everybody, all household records, all
photos of nearest'n'dearest etc etc etc
- make backup eg daily on either a remote device or a local one that you
physically disconnect after each use.

Destruction of machine by domestic gas explosion, fire, crashing jumbo
jet, meteor impact etc
- average would be ascertainable; probably low but not zero
- house occupants would also die so machine-loss relatively unimportant
- go all-electric? Maintain house security? Keep a backup in a different
property? Move to a disused mine?

And so on!

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 06:44:10, Andy <an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <ZLwq6sC56+3eFwYo@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
><john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote
>[]
>>I seem to be the only one whose website /did/ get taken down. When I
>>put in www.jhall.demon.co.uk I get a names.co.uk branded page saying:
>>
>>Don’t let this space go to waste
>>Make jhall.demon.co.uk work hard for you
>>Create your online
>>presence today
>>Set up your FREE one page website simply activate and add your details
>>
>http://www.kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk/ got the same treatment.

Likewise soft255 (mine), nutbrook (Eileen's), and icetea (an example
given in one of the Namesco emails). I think any former *DCU address
brings that up (whether you include the www. or not), other than those
that actually produce an actual result. If you try something that was
_never_ a Demon user - well, I tried xyzzy.demon.co.uk (with and without
www.) - you get whatever your browser normally shows for "site cannot be
found".

Namesco saying "make *.dcu work for you" is a bit disingenuous of them
with the imminent demise'; I presume it is their normal filler for any
hostname they, er, host where the user hasn't uploaded anything.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Although I may disagree with what you say, I will defend to the death your
right to hear me tell you how wrong you are.

[John Hall]

In message <yoj8MNTF...@david.rance.org.uk>, David Rance
<david...@SPAMOFF.invalid> writes

But IIRC I didn't even need to ask.

[David Rance]

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:28:43 John Hall wrote:

>In message <yoj8MNTF...@david.rance.org.uk>, David Rance
><david...@SPAMOFF.invalid> writes
>>On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 21:19:05 John Hall wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>I seem to be the only one whose website /did/ get taken down.
>>
>>No, mine was taken down after I rang them and asked the young lady to
>>remove it, PLEASE! She did so immediately. The only way I can find my
>>old pages is to use the wayback machine.
>
>But IIRC I didn't even need to ask.

Then yes, I think you may well be the only one!

[r...@amygdala.xyz]

Our website was removed on the transfer to Namesco, without warning and we did want to keep it. We didn't use it a great deal but R kept a copy of his up-to-date CV there for recruitment agencies to download easily.

Ray.

[Ruth E]

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 9:51:13 AM UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 24/04/2020 20:02, Chris Pitt Lewis wrote:
> > Here is an extract from the reply I received today, after a bit of toing
> > and froing:
> > ".....we have just had news from Vodafone of an agreed extension until
> > 1st September 2020, this is a couple of days after the expiry date of
> > your current package as such you can continue to receive emails right up
> > until your current expiry date of the package."
> > Not clear if this applies to everyone, or just to those who have made a
> > fuss.

Thank you, thank you, thank you to whoever it was on here who mentioned the 1st Sep extension. Namesco didn't even notify me about the demise of my Demon email until 20th April (a month later than some on here), and then dragged their feet with setting up my replacement domain name (not live until 21st May) and duplicating all of my email aliases (completed 28th May). That left me just 2 weeks to update 450+ websites with my new email addresses. But, thanks to the advice given here, they have agreed to an extension to 1st Sep. From my own experience, it seems that you may well need to ask for the extension - all of their comms still reference a 14th June end date, and it is only after asking for clarification (based on what I've read here and on Twitter) that they "can confirm [my] extension to 1st September 2020 has been granted".

[Martin Brown]

On 11/06/2020 19:14, Ruth E wrote:
> On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 9:51:13 AM UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 24/04/2020 20:02, Chris Pitt Lewis wrote:
>>> Here is an extract from the reply I received today, after a bit
>>> of toing and froing: ".....we have just had news from Vodafone of
>>> an agreed extension until 1st September 2020, this is a couple of
>>> days after the expiry date of your current package as such you
>>> can continue to receive emails right up until your current expiry
>>> date of the package." Not clear if this applies to everyone, or
>>> just to those who have made a fuss.
>
> Thank you, thank you, thank you to whoever it was on here who
> mentioned the 1st Sep extension. Namesco didn't even notify me about
> the demise of my Demon email until 20th April (a month later than
> some on here), and then dragged their feet with setting up my
> replacement domain name (not live until 21st May) and duplicating all
> of my email aliases (completed 28th May). That left me just 2 weeks
> to update 450+ websites with my new email addresses. But, thanks to

Use an edit script to do a simple swap of one for the other.

> the advice given here, they have agreed to an extension to 1st Sep.
> From my own experience, it seems that you may well need to ask for
> the extension - all of their comms still reference a 14th June end
> date, and it is only after asking for clarification (based on what
> I've read here and on Twitter) that they "can confirm [my] extension
> to 1st September 2020 has been granted".

You are probably OK but any laggards that have been ignoring the Namesco
emails and "urgent and final warnings" of Voodofones intent to terminate
really do need to get a move on and sort things out PDQ.

Default next drop dead date for excommunication is 28/7/20 in their FAQ
Demonic demise and exorcism is here and may well be kept up to date:

https://www.names.co.uk/support/email/demon_email/2850-demon_email_questions_and_answers.html

It wouldn't surprise me if there was one last extension of the extension
but don't bank on there being anything at all but smoke after 1/9/20.

To some extent my sympathies are with Namesco - from the outset they
were handed (literally thrown over the wall) a poison chalice. And
now Voodofone have decided to nuke the demon.co.uk port access key.

VF seem to be having a bit of bother handling mobile calls too.
- has someone suitably demonic been putting a hex on them?

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 at 19:32:17, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[]

>You are probably OK but any laggards that have been ignoring the
>Namesco emails and "urgent and final warnings" of Voodofones intent to
>terminate really do need to get a move on and sort things out PDQ.

(I presume nezumi.dcu has done so!)

>
>Default next drop dead date for excommunication is 28/7/20 in their FAQ
>Demonic demise and exorcism is here and may well be kept up to date:
>
>https://www.names.co.uk/support/email/demon_email/2850-demon_email_ques
>tions_and_answers.html

Their linked document - has 2849 in the name, I think - has instructions
for how to do the necessary changes, in lots of softwares. Sadly, not
including Turnpike; I know Namesco have never had anything to do with
TP, but in the circumstances it'd have been nice if they did.

_If_ I understand what they say for other softwares, the only thing that
has to be done on the agreed changeover date (_not_ 1 September; agreed
per customer) is change the _username_ (in most cases, that is the email
address) in two places - one for collecting mail, one for sending it.
Obviously changes to the TP "personality" also need making so the From:
and Reply-To: headers get changed before death date, but those don't
_have_ to be done on changeover date - could be done before or after.

(If there's anything else in TP that needs changing, please share: I'm
helping someone. She's not changed anything [in TP; she's bought a
domain] yet, and is already receiving emails to both old and new
addresses.)

>
>It wouldn't surprise me if there was one last extension of the
>extension but don't bank on there being anything at all but smoke after
>1/9/20.

Unless Vodafone change their mind, AIUI Namesco can't change _that_.

>
>To some extent my sympathies are with Namesco - from the outset they
>were handed (literally thrown over the wall) a poison chalice. And
>now Voodofone have decided to nuke the demon.co.uk port access key.

Namesco seem to be being a bit better this time. Though not perfect -
you have to make sure you get someone who knows about it. And not all
departments/personnel know about the new dates.

>
>VF seem to be having a bit of bother handling mobile calls too.
>- has someone suitably demonic been putting a hex on them?
>

(-:

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

It's OK to be tight on
The seafront at Brighton
But I say, by Jove
Watch out if it's Hove.
- Sister Monica Joan, quoted by Jennifer Worth (author of the Call the
Midwife books, quoted in Radio Times 19-25 January 2013)

[strathspey...@gmail.com]

My cut-off date was meant to be the 14th of June. After reading a few posts here I phoned Namesco and it's been extended to 1st September with no fuss. It's there for the asking to anyone who wants an extension.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

There are two dates - _if_ you've arranged a replacement domain with
them. 1 September is the date when the old Demon identities will
disappear altogether. But if you've registered your new domain with
Namesco, they change the "username" their servers expect you (or your
email software, obviously) to use when collecting and sending email.
Obviously, they didn't _have_ to change that AFAICS - they could set any
stream they like for username, so they _could_ have let the old demon
email live on for ever as just a username - but they've decided not to.
The person I'm helping (she's arranged to register yyy.net, through
Namesco) has been told her username will change from x...@yyy.demon.co.uk
to x...@yyy.net, on a specific date to be agreed between her and Namesco.
Actually, the default is _they_ tell _you_ what the date'll be, but if
you call them up they'll let you change it.

That's my understanding, anyway.

If you've registered a new domain with some other provider, or not
registered one at all, then 1 September is the only date of interest.

There's also the possibility that any prepaid contract you had with
Namesco - if prepaid on a yearly basis, say - might run out before 1
September. But I get the impression from hints here that anyone with a
.dcu address whose contract runs out before then and hasn't bought a new
domain from Namesco, they're extending until then anyway, at least if
asked.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Try to tell me to watch something because it's brilliant and everyone says so
and therefore I will love it, too, and you lose me for ever.
- Alison Graham, RT 2016/2/6-12

[Chris Pitt Lewis]

On 12/06/2020 21:29, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

>
> There's also the possibility that any prepaid contract you had with
> Namesco - if prepaid on a yearly basis, say - might run out before 1
> September. But I get the impression from hints here that anyone with a

> ..dcu address whose contract runs out before then and hasn't bought a

> new domain from Namesco, they're extending until then anyway, at least
> if asked.

My prepaid contract runs out on 29 (or perhaps 28) August. What Namesco
told me was that, since they had negotiated an extension with Vodafone
until 1 September, my access to emails sent to my demon address would
continue until the expiry of my contract.

This was in the context of my telling them that I already had another
email address, did not require their services once they could no longer
provide my demon address, and would want a refund if my demon address
ended before my contract expired. See my post on 24 April which began
this thread.
--
Chris Pitt Lewis

[Martin Brown]

On 12/06/2020 21:29, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 at 12:23:15, strathspey...@gmail.com wrote:
>> My cut-off date was meant to be the 14th of June. After reading a few
>> posts here I phoned Namesco and it's been extended to 1st September
>> with no fuss. It's there for the asking to anyone who wants an extension.
>
> There are two dates - _if_ you've arranged a replacement domain with
> them. 1 September is the date when the old Demon identities will
> disappear altogether. But if you've registered your new domain with
> Namesco, they change the "username" their servers expect you (or your
> email software, obviously) to use when collecting and sending email.

I have a feeling that anyone who was really on the ball and moved very
quickly after the first notification will be moved over on Monday 15/6 -
if anyone was in that first wave please post your experience here.

That has to happen once the root demon.co.uk and demon.net ceases to
exist or more likely the handlers for subdomains on it are turned off.

<anything>.demon.co.uk

will then fail "unresolvable, domain not found" or worse.

You need to have altered all your subscriptions that point to the old
address before the final deadline or you will end up in the bind where
confirmation emails containing links will go to a dead letter box.

> Obviously, they didn't _have_ to change that AFAICS - they could set any
> stream they like for username, so they _could_ have let the old demon
> email live on for ever as just a username - but they've decided not to.

No they can't because Voodoofone control the demon.co.uk domain records
and for some mysterious reason won't release them to Namesco.

*Everything* .demon.co.uk will cease to exist when they pull the plug.

> The person I'm helping (she's arranged to register yyy.net, through
> Namesco) has been told her username will change from x...@yyy.demon.co.uk
> to x...@yyy.net, on a specific date to be agreed between her and Namesco.

It has to since yyy.net or whatever new domain she chooses will take
over mail from the defunct demon.co.uk. The prefixes can remain the same
so if you stay with Namesco your mailbox aliases can transfer across
automatically - at least that is what I am hoping for. In the interim
they do a redirect so that anything still going to the old Demonic
address ends up in the new mailbox until it finally gets zapped.

My conversion from Demonic influence is in progress. Time will tell.

I'd be interested to know how any early converts got on.

> Actually, the default is _they_ tell _you_ what the date'll be, but if
> you call them up they'll let you change it.
>
> That's my understanding, anyway.
>
> If you've registered a new domain with some other provider, or not
> registered one at all, then 1 September is the only date of interest.

Err no! The default nuking date unless you do something fairly soon is
28/7 according to their FAQ which I have referenced elsewehre. You have
to ask nicely to get a stay of execution/exorcism until 1/9.

It is possible they will offer a period of grace or that nothing much
will happen on Demonic D-day and the zombie websites will live forever.

> There's also the possibility that any prepaid contract you had with
> Namesco - if prepaid on a yearly basis, say - might run out before 1
> September. But I get the impression from hints here that anyone with a
> .dcu address whose contract runs out before then and hasn't bought a new
> domain from Namesco, they're extending until then anyway, at least if
> asked.

It would be doubly ironic if the renewal is imminent warning message
please pay up now ended up going to a defunct .dcu email account.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[John Hall]

In message <kfL8GFI9...@255soft.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6...@255soft.uk> writes
<snip>

>The person I'm helping (she's arranged to register yyy.net, through
>Namesco) has been told her username will change from
>x...@yyy.demon.co.uk to x...@yyy.net, on a specific date to be agreed
>between her and Namesco.

I remember the old days, when only ISPs had domains ending in .net. So,
for instance, it was obvious from someone's email address whether they
worked for Demon or were just a Demon customer. I thought it was a
useful distinction, and rather regret that it lapsed.

[jg....@gmail.com]

On Saturday, 13 June 2020 09:12:32 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:

> I have a feeling that anyone who was really on the ball and moved very
> quickly after the first notification will be moved over on Monday 15/6 -
> if anyone was in that first wave please post your experience here.
>

I might be in that first wave, currently expecting my demon e-mail to disappear 14th or 15th June.

I went for a new domain with namesco, as part of the move they offered to put a catchall in for e-mail to the new domain, seemed like a good idea.

So currently I'm receiving mail to the new domain and old demon addresses just fine. One thing I couldn't do was send any mail outside after stage 3 kicked in, all mail that I tried to send - no matter what the address was delivered to the existing inbox, namesco thought this was something to do with the catchall set up so that was removed and seemed to solve the problem.

Incoming e-mail to the new domain if a valid alias didn't exist was being bounced by postmaster@ the old demon domain, namesco have fixed that so bounces now come from postmaster at the new domain.

I've asked to change the new username to something reflecting the new domain rather than the legacy demononcasca.onmicrosoft stuff, they've changed it and that is fine.

I'm still seeing stuff referencing demon in my accounts settings, which I'll think about querying after my demon demise.

The updated namesco faq references different demise dates depending on how far you are along in the process.

hope this helps

Jim

[Bryan Morris]

In message <GbgarYBG6J5eFwaF@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes

>In message <kfL8GFI9...@255soft.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6...@255soft.uk> writes
><snip>
>>The person I'm helping (she's arranged to register yyy.net, through
>>Namesco) has been told her username will change from
>>x...@yyy.demon.co.uk to x...@yyy.net, on a specific date to be agreed
>>between her and Namesco.
>
>I remember the old days, when only ISPs had domains ending in .net. So,
>for instance, it was obvious from someone's email address whether they
>worked for Demon or were just a Demon customer. I thought it was a
>useful distinction, and rather regret that it lapsed.

My very first ISP was Which.net and my email address was "me"@which.net

Those were the days when, if you had a query someone phoned you, then a
few days later they phoned again to make sure you were satisfied

Only stayed with them a year as realised I was paying a premium price as
it included membership of Which magazine (which I didn't need) and
joined Demon
--
Bryan Morris

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 09:12:30, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 12/06/2020 21:29, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 at 12:23:15, strathspey...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> My cut-off date was meant to be the 14th of June. After reading a
>>>few posts here I phoned Namesco and it's been extended to 1st
>>>September with no fuss. It's there for the asking to anyone who
>>>wants an extension.
>> There are two dates - _if_ you've arranged a replacement domain with
>>them. 1 September is the date when the old Demon identities will
>>disappear altogether. But if you've registered your new domain with
>>Namesco, they change the "username" their servers expect you (or your
>>email software, obviously) to use when collecting and sending email.
>
>I have a feeling that anyone who was really on the ball and moved very
>quickly after the first notification will be moved over on Monday 15/6
>- if anyone was in that first wave please post your experience here.
>
>That has to happen once the root demon.co.uk and demon.net ceases to
>exist or more likely the handlers for subdomains on it are turned off.
>
><anything>.demon.co.uk
>
>will then fail "unresolvable, domain not found" or worse.

Agreed, anything involving it on the big bad internet outside will fail,
as DNS and other look-up services will no longer be able to resolve it.
That would apply to websites, email, and possibly other things.

However, it could continue AS A USERNAME FOR LOGIN PURPOSES: a service
provider can, surely, use any string of characters they like as a
username, limited only by the parsing ability of their login machine.
They could use THE GREAT PINK PANJANDRUM as a username (though most
parsers don't accept spaces). The user, once past the user
login/password stage, could only receive emails to a valid address.
(Whether they can send emails _from_ an invalid address is up to the
policy of the company - often the ISP, though not necessarily - running
the outgoing [e. g. SMTP] server; for example, I've been with PlusNet
for years, and have sent emails "From" initially my .dcu address, and
now my own hostname address, and [except when they fall foul of its
excessively paranoid content filter] they've gone out no trouble. I
don't think I've ever used my official PlusNet address, except to talk
to PlusNet themselves.)

>
>You need to have altered all your subscriptions that point to the old
>address before the final deadline or you will end up in the bind where
>confirmation emails containing links will go to a dead letter box.

Yes, you need to make sure no-one's using the old address _as an
address_ before then. Namesco have also decided to make you change the
_username_ *used to log into their servers*, _which has been one of your
demon addresses_ - but need not have been: it could still have remained
at that. On the whole, if only because of the confusion shown here, I
guess they probably _are_ right to force that change.

If you like, "Username" is just another password for technical purposes;
the only difference from the (second) password is that, usually, the
provider rather than the customer sets it. (In some cases the customer
also sets it at first registration - most free websites are like that -
but then can't change it thereafter.)

>
>> Obviously, they didn't _have_ to change that AFAICS - they could set
>>any stream they like for username, so they _could_ have let the old
>>demon email live on for ever as just a username - but they've decided
>>not to.
>
>No they can't because Voodoofone control the demon.co.uk domain records
>and for some mysterious reason won't release them to Namesco.

They could have kept it _as the username (only)_. They have chosen not
to, which on balance I think is probably a good choice (even though it
means more changes for my non-technical friend).

>
>*Everything* .demon.co.uk will cease to exist when they pull the plug.

On the big bad outside internet, yes.

>
>> The person I'm helping (she's arranged to register yyy.net, through
>>Namesco) has been told her username will change from
>>x...@yyy.demon.co.uk to x...@yyy.net, on a specific date to be agreed
>>between her and Namesco.
>
>It has to since yyy.net or whatever new domain she chooses will take

Her _email_ has to change because the old one will cease to be
resolvable. (Ditto website, if she had one, which she doesn't.)

>over mail from the defunct demon.co.uk. The prefixes can remain the
>same so if you stay with Namesco your mailbox aliases can transfer
>across automatically - at least that is what I am hoping for. In the
>interim they do a redirect so that anything still going to the old
>Demonic address ends up in the new mailbox until it finally gets zapped.

Actually, there is confusion over the various terms - alias, mailbox,
and a few others. AFAIK, my friend only ever used one email @ her .dcu
address. I tried sending her a test email using the same prefix @ her
new domain - and she got it, in the same mailbox (using the term in the
Turnpike sense) as email to her old address. Somewhat later, I tried
sending a test to a different email @ her new domain, to see if she got
it or not - but I actually got a bounce, which surprised me.

The bounce is "from" "postmaster@<her-domain>.demon.co.uk".

It says (details redacted into <generics>):

Your message to <test>@<herdomain>.net couldn't be delivered.
<test> wasn't found at <herdomain>.net.
g6jpg Office 365 <test>
Action Required Recipient
Unknown To address

(Then some "How to fix it" text of the usual sort, all of which assumed
I'd mistyped it, then:)

"More Info for Email Admins
Status code: 550 5.1.10

This error occurs because the sender sent a message to an email address
hosted by Office 365 but the address is incorrect or doesn't exist at
the destination domain. The error is reported by the recipient domain's
email server, but most often it must be fixed by the person who sent the
message."

and a lot more to do with Office 365 that is beyond me.

Where it says "The error is reported by the recipient domain's email
server", that's presumably something to do with something inside
Namesco; I'd be most surprised if it came from Turnpike running on her
machine, especially with the "Office 365" in it.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone with a domain administered by
Namesco: are you able to use <anything> before the @, like you used to
be able to do with Demon, or do you have to register (or ...) each
variant with something in Namesco/Office365 before you use it? That'd be
tedious; I can use anyt...@255soft.uk without having to tell TSOhost
beforehand, and I thought that was one of the advantages of _having_
your own domain.

>
>My conversion from Demonic influence is in progress. Time will tell.
>
>I'd be interested to know how any early converts got on.
>
>> Actually, the default is _they_ tell _you_ what the date'll be, but
>>if you call them up they'll let you change it.
>> That's my understanding, anyway.
>> If you've registered a new domain with some other provider, or not
>>registered one at all, then 1 September is the only date of interest.
>
>Err no! The default nuking date unless you do something fairly soon is
>28/7 according to their FAQ which I have referenced elsewehre. You have
>to ask nicely to get a stay of execution/exorcism until 1/9.
>
>It is possible they will offer a period of grace or that nothing much
>will happen on Demonic D-day and the zombie websites will live forever.
>
>> There's also the possibility that any prepaid contract you had with
>>Namesco - if prepaid on a yearly basis, say - might run out before 1
>>September. But I get the impression from hints here that anyone with a
>>.dcu address whose contract runs out before then and hasn't bought a
>>new domain from Namesco, they're extending until then anyway, at
>>least if asked.
>
>It would be doubly ironic if the renewal is imminent warning message
>please pay up now ended up going to a defunct .dcu email account.
>

Indeed!

I will share my (non-computer-minded) friend's experience. She is
somewhat stressed by the process. She did ask to be delayed, and they
said they would, but initially forgot and changed her - so she had
problems, and called them, and they put things back for now. Here's the
timeline so far:

She got the notification. She asked my advice; I explained that she
could go to anyone for hosting, who might or might not be cheaper and/or
better than Namesco, though staying with Namesco might be less bother
(and they were offering a year's free for three types of domain, though
I don't think .net was one of them).

She decided to stay with Namesco, getting a .net domain with the same
prefix as her .dcu one.

She got the email from ICANN saying in effect "this domain has been set
up, giving your address; please click here to confirm, or it'll be
deactivated in a fortnight". I think this was sent to her .dcu address -
tedious, but understandable. She didn't realise she could click on blue
text in emails so forwarded it to a friend, who did; this seems to have
worked.

About the same time, she got an email from Namesco giving her a (quite
early: May [her surname begins with C, so if they're doing customers in
Alpha order, that'd make sense]) date on which they'd change her
username; she rang them, and got agreement they'd hold back until she
told them, as long as that was before another date.

I sent a test email to her new address. She was (and is) continuing to
receive emails to her old address; my test email arrived among them.

I then received an email from her backup (gmail) address, that her
emails had stopped working - including a Word document containing
screenshots of her Turnpike connect logs. Looking at those, I could see
(as well as that she was still trying to collect news from
news.demon.co.uk, which was still responding! asking for authentication,
though it presumably wasn't getting it [she doesn't read news with
Turnpike]), that she'd been "Collecting mail from POP3 server 127.0.0.1"
every 15 minutes, until (presumably it happened around 01:00) there was

Fri, 8 May 2020 01:12:40 POP3 command failure while talking to 127.0.0.1
PASS *****
-ERR Login failure: unknown user name or bad password.

which then repeated every 15 minutes. Then

Fri, 8 May 2020 02:25:14 SMTP command rejected while talking to
[127.0.0.1]: <random-looking-string>
535 5.7.3 Authentication unsuccessful
[<randomstring>.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM]

which also seemed to repeat, though at more irregular intervals. (I
presume it had actually been changed at the same time, but she just
hadn't tried sending an email until then.)

She called them the next day, and they reverted it, and all worked
again. Currently planning to have them do the change around end of June.

I _think_ all we have to do is:

_On_ the changeover date: change the username for the two servers in
Turnpike.

Before or after that: change the personality, or make a new one and set
it as the default, in Turnpike, so her emails come from the new address.

Ideally (and the sooner the better), set up a signature file to tell
people of the change.

Tell ICANN of the new communications address for the domain. Ideally
before Demon-death date, in case they send a confirmation email to the
old one that contains something that needs to be clicked on: anyone know
if they do?

I'm a little concerned, now that I come to tell you this, that she seems
to be using POP3 and SMTP servers of address 127.0.0.1 rather than real
names; suggests she's using some proxy, such as Mailwasher, stunnel, or
some AV software; I hope I don't have to find my way round whatever that
is - remotely! - to see where to change the username. _Hopefully_,
whatever it is will be passing through the username from Turnpike.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Bother," said Pooh, as he tasted the bacon in his sandwich.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 03:46:10, jg....@gmail.com wrote:
>On Saturday, 13 June 2020 09:12:32 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
>
>> I have a feeling that anyone who was really on the ball and moved very
>> quickly after the first notification will be moved over on Monday 15/6 -
>> if anyone was in that first wave please post your experience here.
>>
>I might be in that first wave, currently expecting my demon e-mail to
>disappear 14th or 15th June.
>
>I went for a new domain with namesco, as part of the move they offered
>to put a catchall in for e-mail to the new domain, seemed like a good
>idea.

You mean so <anything> at newdomain is accepted? I'd have hoped that was
the default (but isn't - see my long post), so please share what you
have to ask for to get it. Not that, AFAIK, my friend ever used anything
other than one mail @domain.dcu, but it'd be a useful facility for her
to have.

>
>So currently I'm receiving mail to the new domain and old demon
>addresses just fine. One thing I couldn't do was send any mail outside
>after stage 3 kicked in, all mail that I tried to send - no matter what
>the address was delivered to the existing inbox, namesco thought this
>was something to do with the catchall set up so that was removed and
>seemed to solve the problem.

Oh dear. You mean you couldn't, for example, email me?

>
>Incoming e-mail to the new domain if a valid alias didn't exist was
>being bounced by postmaster@ the old demon domain, namesco have fixed
>that so bounces now come from postmaster at the new domain.

Yes, I've found that for other than the one email for my friend.

>
>I've asked to change the new username to something reflecting the new
>domain rather than the legacy demononcasca.onmicrosoft stuff, they've
>changed it and that is fine.
>
>I'm still seeing stuff referencing demon in my accounts settings, which
>I'll think about querying after my demon demise.
>
>The updated namesco faq references different demise dates depending on
>how far you are along in the process.
>
>hope this helps
>
>Jim

AIUI, there's:

A. set up new domain (hurry if you haven't!)

B. change username-expected-by-servers

C. *.demon.co.uk disappear in a puff of smoke (possibly a few hours
propagating round DNS/MX/A servers).

AIUI, B. is a date Namesco give you (which you can ask them to delay,
possibly right up to C [my friend's was originally 8 May]), and C is
fixed at 1 September.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Bother," said Pooh, as he fell off the bridge with his stick.

[Ruth E]

On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 7:11:08 PM UTC+1, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> I'd be interested to hear from anyone with a domain administered by
> Namesco: are you able to use <anything> before the @, like you used to
> be able to do with Demon, or do you have to register (or ...) each
> variant with something in Namesco/Office365 before you use it? That'd be
> tedious; I can use anyt...@255soft.uk without having to tell TSOhost
> beforehand, and I thought that was one of the advantages of _having_
> your own domain.

Since moving to Namesco with my dcu address in 2016 I have had to set up each alias (in MS365) before I can use it. I wasn't best pleased about that initially, having been used to the Demon catch-all and being able to set up new aliases on the fly. However, I am now used to it, and quite like being able to delete aliases which start receiving a lot of spam.

When Namesco were recently dragging their feet about duplicating my dcu aliases over to my new domain name, one tech support person did ask whether I'd be interested in a catch-all setup (in which case he would enquire whether it was feasible). But I opted to stick with the status quo, so I don't know whether or not catch-all might be an option now, but I suspect not.

Ruth

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 11:24:18, Ruth E <cemy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 7:11:08 PM UTC+1, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> I'd be interested to hear from anyone with a domain administered by
>> Namesco: are you able to use <anything> before the @, like you used to
>> be able to do with Demon, or do you have to register (or ...) each
>> variant with something in Namesco/Office365 before you use it? That'd be
>> tedious; I can use anyt...@255soft.uk without having to tell TSOhost
>> beforehand, and I thought that was one of the advantages of _having_
>> your own domain.
>
>Since moving to Namesco with my dcu address in 2016 I have had to set
>up each alias (in MS365) before I can use it. I wasn't best pleased
>about that initially, having been used to the Demon catch-all and being

I'm not either, on behalf of my friend (though AFAIK she doesn't use
other than a single address; but it'd be a useful facility).

>able to set up new aliases on the fly. However, I am now used to it,
>and quite like being able to delete aliases which start receiving a lot
>of spam.

I can see that. (I've never suffered myself, in that way.)

>
>When Namesco were recently dragging their feet about duplicating my dcu
>aliases over to my new domain name, one tech support person did ask
>whether I'd be interested in a catch-all setup (in which case he would
>enquire whether it was feasible). But I opted to stick with the status
>quo, so I don't know whether or not catch-all might be an option now,
>but I suspect not.

Another poster has said it was, though he had it turned off as he was
told it might be the cause of problems he was having with _outgoing_
email (if I understand him correctly). [I find that hard to believe.]
>
>Ruth
John

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

[Joe]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 19:33:28 +0100
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:


>
> Another poster has said it was, though he had it turned off as he was
> told it might be the cause of problems he was having with _outgoing_
> email (if I understand him correctly). [I find that hard to believe.]

Generally, within a SMTP server application, both incoming and outgoing
email pass through the same processing software. So if the same physical
server is used for incoming and outgoing email, then presumably it
might just be possible to mis-configure it to accept *all* email that
arrives, going in and out, instead of just all email for the
appropriate domain(s).

Most serious SMTP servers (Exchange, Exim etc.) don't have a catch-all
option, in order to create one it would be necessary to add code using
the server's configuration scripting language, and errors could be
made.

--
Joe

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 21:33:34, Joe <j...@jretrading.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 19:33:28 +0100
>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Another poster has said it was, though he had it turned off as he was
>> told it might be the cause of problems he was having with _outgoing_
>> email (if I understand him correctly). [I find that hard to believe.]
>
>Generally, within a SMTP server application, both incoming and outgoing
>email pass through the same processing software. So if the same physical
>server is used for incoming and outgoing email, then presumably it

Ah, I hadn't thought of that!

>might just be possible to mis-configure it to accept *all* email that
>arrives, going in and out, instead of just all email for the
>appropriate domain(s).

An oops, however!

>
>Most serious SMTP servers (Exchange, Exim etc.) don't have a catch-all
>option, in order to create one it would be necessary to add code using
>the server's configuration scripting language, and errors could be
>made.
>

I'm surprised. But take your word for it.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"I'm tired of all this nonsense about beauty being only skin-deep. That's deep
enough. What do you want, an adorable pancreas?" - Jean Kerr

[Chris S]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 19:08:16 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:

>I'm a little concerned, now that I come to tell you this, that she seems
>to be using POP3 and SMTP servers of address 127.0.0.1 rather than real
>names; suggests she's using some proxy, such as Mailwasher, stunnel, or
>some AV software;

FYI, Mailwasher does not function as a proxy, it does a pre-check of
your mail queue at your ISP for 'unwanted and undesirable' items, and
deletes said mail from the queue. You then still have to download the
mail from your 'cleaned' ISP's mail queue.

"What Mailwasher does is to log onto that email server first and
download just a small text only portion of each email. This lets you
look at each one and see if it is a spam or a real email. You can then
choose to delete or keep the email, so when you use your email program
to download your email, all the spam has already been deleted."

That sounds more 'klunky' that it actually is in practice. Without
going into too much detail, the filtering is highly configurable and
it doesn't take long to visually scan the list for any false positives
or negatives.

Chris S
--
Demon Customer 1993 - 2015; Gradwell Customer 2002 - 2016; now with Zen for connectivity and Tsohost
for web/email hosting (last Gradwell hosted domains migrated October 2016).

[Joe]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 23:16:21 +0100

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 21:33:34, Joe <j...@jretrading.com> wrote:
> >On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 19:33:28 +0100
> >"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Another poster has said it was, though he had it turned off as he
> >> was told it might be the cause of problems he was having with
> >> _outgoing_ email (if I understand him correctly). [I find that
> >> hard to believe.]
> >
> >Generally, within a SMTP server application, both incoming and
> >outgoing email pass through the same processing software. So if the
> >same physical server is used for incoming and outgoing email, then
> >presumably it
>
> Ah, I hadn't thought of that!
>
> >might just be possible to mis-configure it to accept *all* email that
> >arrives, going in and out, instead of just all email for the
> >appropriate domain(s).
>
> An oops, however!
> >
> >Most serious SMTP servers (Exchange, Exim etc.) don't have a
> >catch-all option, in order to create one it would be necessary to
> >add code using the server's configuration scripting language, and
> >errors could be made.
> >
> I'm surprised. But take your word for it.

*Nobody* messes with a working mail server's configuration without very
good reason and great care. Some simple configurations like blacklists,
smarthosts, HELO and so on are, in the case of exim4, broken out into
simple files and macros, but actually changing the routing or adding a
function will normally involve digging into the fragile bits of the main
configuration file.

'If it ain't broke..' applies at least an order of magnitude greater in
this case.

Unless you're one of these lucky people with a spare mirrored server to
play with...

--
Joe

--
Joe

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 at 14:57:52, Joe <j...@jretrading.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 23:16:21 +0100
>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 21:33:34, Joe <j...@jretrading.com> wrote:
>> >On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 19:33:28 +0100

[]

>> >Most serious SMTP servers (Exchange, Exim etc.) don't have a
>> >catch-all option, in order to create one it would be necessary to
>> >add code using the server's configuration scripting language, and
>> >errors could be made.
>> >
>> I'm surprised. But take your word for it.
>
>*Nobody* messes with a working mail server's configuration without very
>good reason and great care. Some simple configurations like blacklists,
>smarthosts, HELO and so on are, in the case of exim4, broken out into
>simple files and macros, but actually changing the routing or adding a
>function will normally involve digging into the fragile bits of the main
>configuration file.
>
>'If it ain't broke..' applies at least an order of magnitude greater in
>this case.
>
>Unless you're one of these lucky people with a spare mirrored server to
>play with...
>

I repeat, I'm surprised. When I had soft255.demon.co.uk, anything@ it
reached me. Anyt...@255soft.uk reaches me - OK, I set up a forwarding
rule or two (I actually collect my email from PlusNet), but it wasn't
hard.

I always thought it was one of the advantages of having your own domain
(whoever's hosting it); I remember thinking I was lucky to be with an
ISP that used the subdomain method, thus allowing me infinite and
instant aliases, rather than all the poor schmucks stuck with a single
@btinternet, @yahoo, or whatever account. (IIRR btinternet let you have
about ten - gee, how generous - but you had to do something to set each
one up individually.)

>--
>Joe

>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Victory does not bring with it a sense of triumph - rather the dull numbness
of relief..." - Cecil Beaton quoted by Anthony Horowitz, RT 2015/1/3-9

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 at 13:34:02, Chris S <myr9g...@snkmail.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 19:08:16 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>I'm a little concerned, now that I come to tell you this, that she seems
>>to be using POP3 and SMTP servers of address 127.0.0.1 rather than real
>>names; suggests she's using some proxy, such as Mailwasher, stunnel, or
>>some AV software;
>
>FYI, Mailwasher does not function as a proxy, it does a pre-check of
>your mail queue at your ISP for 'unwanted and undesirable' items, and
>deletes said mail from the queue. You then still have to download the
>mail from your 'cleaned' ISP's mail queue.

Ah, OK. I had no intention of dissing it - my blind friend has used it
in the past; I just _assumed_ it worked as an intermediary.

>
>"What Mailwasher does is to log onto that email server first and
>download just a small text only portion of each email. This lets you
>look at each one and see if it is a spam or a real email. You can then
>choose to delete or keep the email, so when you use your email program
>to download your email, all the spam has already been deleted."
>
>That sounds more 'klunky' that it actually is in practice. Without
>going into too much detail, the filtering is highly configurable and
>it doesn't take long to visually scan the list for any false positives
>or negatives.
>
>Chris S

I wonder if the "small text only portion" means the header, or whether
it can get a bit of the body too.

OK, so it isn't Mailwasher. I've asked my friend to tell me what
Turnpike has as her POP3 server and "Mailbox", and her SMTP server and
"User name", in the hope that the latter in each case are what Namesco
call the "username" and are what need changing, even if the servers are
127.0.0.1 - i. e. I'm hoping whatever local is getting in the way is
just passing those (and the passwords) through.

Anyone else here still using Turnpike with Namesco to handle .dcu email?
If so what do _you_ have for those four parameters (substitute with
generics like "<username>" before posting, of course)?

I'm trying to remember if we had to set up some intermediary like
stunnel at some point. I certainly didn't initially, but I abandoned
.dcu and Namesco when they subsequently rattled the cage, so can't
remember if my friend had to introduce something at that point.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

[Joe]

On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 15:53:17 +0100

Business users don't use catch-alls, at least not after you beat the MD
about the head with the proverbial 2x4. Salesmen are so desperate for
leads, they want misspelled addresses to work as well. But if someone
tries to email you, and they get a 'not known on this domain', they
will give the address they were given a hard look, see their mistake
and correct it. One day it will be *important* that they have the
correct email address for you.

And for those who can't tolerate false positives in spam detection,
limiting received emails to genuine accounts is the single most
effective anti-spam measure. And yes, I do know. The address at the top
of this message is genuine, unmangled and has been in use for twenty-two
years on various bits of the Internet, including some much more
travelled bits of Usenet than the Demon groups. I decided to see whether
that was practical, and it has been. I get maybe two spams in my inbox
in a week after all that time. I've achieved this by having a very
aggressive mail server which rejects about a thousand more in that
week, mostly on the basis of user name. It also rejects mail from about
twenty of the most egregious countries, a couple of specific ISPs, a
few companies who don't understand 'don't send me any more emails' and
the wretched .biz suffix.

--
Joe

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 at 17:41:51, Joe <j...@jretrading.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 15:53:17 +0100
>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:

[]

>> I always thought it was one of the advantages of having your own
>> domain (whoever's hosting it); I remember thinking I was lucky to be
>> with an ISP that used the subdomain method, thus allowing me infinite
>> and instant aliases, rather than all the poor schmucks stuck with a
>> single @btinternet, @yahoo, or whatever account. (IIRR btinternet let
>> you have about ten - gee, how generous - but you had to do something
>> to set each one up individually.)
>>
>Business users don't use catch-alls, at least not after you beat the MD
>about the head with the proverbial 2x4. Salesmen are so desperate for
>leads, they want misspelled addresses to work as well. But if someone
>tries to email you, and they get a 'not known on this domain', they
>will give the address they were given a hard look, see their mistake
>and correct it. One day it will be *important* that they have the
>correct email address for you.

I can see that. But I'm not a business, and the odd time I want a new
one, not having to put a penny in the slot and crank the handle three
times is convenient. (I can see that for some businesses - especially
one-man bands - it could be, too.)

>
>And for those who can't tolerate false positives in spam detection,
>limiting received emails to genuine accounts is the single most
>effective anti-spam measure. And yes, I do know. The address at the top
>of this message is genuine, unmangled and has been in use for twenty-two
>years on various bits of the Internet, including some much more
>travelled bits of Usenet than the Demon groups. I decided to see whether

I too have AFAICR always used a valid address on usenet - usually my
default one ...

>that was practical, and it has been. I get maybe two spams in my inbox
>in a week after all that time. I've achieved this by having a very

... I get nowhere near that many (it _might_ have been approaching that
towards the end of my .dcu one, but I don't _think_ it was) ...

>aggressive mail server which rejects about a thousand more in that
>week, mostly on the basis of user name. It also rejects mail from about
>twenty of the most egregious countries, a couple of specific ISPs, a
>few companies who don't understand 'don't send me any more emails' and
>the wretched .biz suffix.
>

... and I have almost no filtering. I guess I've just been lucky.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If you carry on hating, you're the one who's damaged.
- Sir Harold Atcherley, sent to the Burma/Siam railway in April 1943

[Chris S]

On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 16:05:43 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"

<G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 at 13:34:02, Chris S <myr9g...@snkmail.com> wrote:
>>On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 19:08:16 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>><G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>I'm a little concerned, now that I come to tell you this, that she seems
>>>to be using POP3 and SMTP servers of address 127.0.0.1 rather than real
>>>names; suggests she's using some proxy, such as Mailwasher, stunnel, or
>>>some AV software;
>>
>>FYI, Mailwasher does not function as a proxy, it does a pre-check of
>>your mail queue at your ISP for 'unwanted and undesirable' items, and
>>deletes said mail from the queue. You then still have to download the
>>mail from your 'cleaned' ISP's mail queue.
>
>Ah, OK. I had no intention of dissing it - my blind friend has used it
>in the past; I just _assumed_ it worked as an intermediary.

[Quoting complete reply so as not to 'hijack' your other RFIs]

Never crossed my mind. My "FYI"s are neutral. :-)

>>
>>"What Mailwasher does is to log onto that email server first and
>>download just a small text only portion of each email. This lets you
>>look at each one and see if it is a spam or a real email. You can then
>>choose to delete or keep the email, so when you use your email program
>>to download your email, all the spam has already been deleted."
>>
>>That sounds more 'klunky' that it actually is in practice. Without
>>going into too much detail, the filtering is highly configurable and
>>it doesn't take long to visually scan the list for any false positives
>>or negatives.
>>
>>Chris S
>
>I wonder if the "small text only portion" means the header, or whether
>it can get a bit of the body too.

It's configurable, the tradeoff being between speed and accuracy. For
as long as I can remember, I have had it set to download and check the
first 200 lines of each mail item. That would include the headers.
It's one of those slide controls and the range is from 0 to 9999
lines.

>
>OK, so it isn't Mailwasher. I've asked my friend to tell me what
>Turnpike has as her POP3 server and "Mailbox", and her SMTP server and
>"User name", in the hope that the latter in each case are what Namesco
>call the "username" and are what need changing, even if the servers are
>127.0.0.1 - i. e. I'm hoping whatever local is getting in the way is
>just passing those (and the passwords) through.
>
>Anyone else here still using Turnpike with Namesco to handle .dcu email?
>If so what do _you_ have for those four parameters (substitute with
>generics like "<username>" before posting, of course)?
>
>I'm trying to remember if we had to set up some intermediary like
>stunnel at some point. I certainly didn't initially, but I abandoned
>.dcu and Namesco when they subsequently rattled the cage, so can't
>remember if my friend had to introduce something at that point.
--

[jg....@gmail.com]

On Saturday, 13 June 2020 19:23:14 UTC+1, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 03:46:10, jg....@gmail.com wrote:

> >I went for a new domain with namesco, as part of the move they offered
> >to put a catchall in for e-mail to the new domain, seemed like a good
> >idea.
>
> You mean so <anything> at newdomain is accepted? I'd have hoped that was
> the default (but isn't - see my long post), so please share what you
> have to ask for to get it. Not that, AFAIK, my friend ever used anything
> other than one mail @domain.dcu, but it'd be a useful facility for her
> to have.

They offered without me asking - "I have noticed you have a large number of aliases setup, these would need to be recreated on the new domain name which we can do, however would you prefer we implement a catch-all for you instead? "

The offer of a catch-all was a bit of a surprise, as when I moved from demon to namesco this was something that wasn't possible at that time and I needed to set up all the aliases.

> >So currently I'm receiving mail to the new domain and old demon
> >addresses just fine. One thing I couldn't do was send any mail outside
> >after stage 3 kicked in, all mail that I tried to send - no matter what
> >the address was delivered to the existing inbox, namesco thought this
> >was something to do with the catchall set up so that was removed and
> >seemed to solve the problem.
>
> Oh dear. You mean you couldn't, for example, email me?

that is correct, everything I attempted to send 'outside' simply appeared in the inbox on the demon account, this may or may not have been linked to the catch-all "We have encountered issues configuring the Catch-All s o this has been removed - it's not actually something Microsoft promote but typically this is something we have been able to configure, however this is causing multiple hops of emails and causing a non delivery report. "

Jim

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Mon, 15 Jun 2020 at 15:08:53, jg....@gmail.com wrote:
>On Saturday, 13 June 2020 19:23:14 UTC+1, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

[]

>>
>> You mean so <anything> at newdomain is accepted? I'd have hoped that was
>> the default (but isn't - see my long post), so please share what you
>> have to ask for to get it. Not that, AFAIK, my friend ever used anything
>> other than one mail @domain.dcu, but it'd be a useful facility for her
>> to have.
>
>They offered without me asking - "I have noticed you have a large
>number of aliases setup, these would need to be recreated on the new
>domain name which we can do, however would you prefer we implement a
>catch-all for you instead? "

Ah. I think my friend only ever uses one, so that won't happen.

>
>The offer of a catch-all was a bit of a surprise, as when I moved from
>demon to namesco this was something that wasn't possible at that time
>and I needed to set up all the aliases.
>
>> >So currently I'm receiving mail to the new domain and old demon
>> >addresses just fine. One thing I couldn't do was send any mail outside
>> >after stage 3 kicked in, all mail that I tried to send - no matter what
>> >the address was delivered to the existing inbox, namesco thought this
>> >was something to do with the catchall set up so that was removed and
>> >seemed to solve the problem.
>>
>> Oh dear. You mean you couldn't, for example, email me?
>
>that is correct, everything I attempted to send 'outside' simply
>appeared in the inbox on the demon account, this may or may not have
>been linked to the catch-all "We have encountered issues configuring
>the Catch-All s o this has been removed - it's not actually something
>Microsoft promote but typically this is something we have been able to
>configure, however this is causing multiple hops of emails and causing
>a non delivery report. "
>
>Jim

Hmm. Sounds pretty incompetent, IMO!

I'll forget about a catchall for now.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Thay have a saying for it: /Geiz ist geil/, which roughly translates as, "It's
sexy to be stingly". - Joe Fattorini, RT insert 2016/9/10-16

[Martin Brown]

On 13/06/2020 11:46, jg....@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, 13 June 2020 09:12:32 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
>
>> I have a feeling that anyone who was really on the ball and moved
>> very quickly after the first notification will be moved over on
>> Monday 15/6 - if anyone was in that first wave please post your
>> experience here.
>>
> I might be in that first wave, currently expecting my demon e-mail to
> disappear 14th or 15th June.

Did it?

My new domain (held with 123-reg) is now linked successfully to
their Microsoft365 mail service. The only bit of their procedure which
assumes Outlook, Apple or other Mickeysoft mail product that I couldn't
follow was the "don't whatever you do re-enter you password". I know
that a fellow Demonite on a complex Apple setup also had fun making it
go - nothing insurmountable but the FAQ doesn't cover all eventualities.

Thunderbird would not let me attach to the mailserver after changing the
account login ID until I provided the right password. And due to an
admin error at my end (memory issue I don't use that PW very often) I
gave the wrong one at the first attempt. Slightly nerve wracking....

Otherwise it seems to work with both nezumi.dcu being forwarded
seamlessly and the new domain taking over as and when I update my
contacts. Opportunity to lose some unwanted mailshots here...

> Incoming e-mail to the new domain if a valid alias didn't exist was
> being bounced by postmaster@ the old demon domain, namesco have fixed
> that so bounces now come from postmaster at the new domain.

I'll test that = thanks for the tip.

> I've asked to change the new username to something reflecting the new
> domain rather than the legacy demononcasca.onmicrosoft stuff, they've
> changed it and that is fine.

I don't really care about that. One last Demonic invocation.

> I'm still seeing stuff referencing demon in my accounts settings,
> which I'll think about querying after my demon demise.
>
> The updated namesco faq references different demise dates depending
> on how far you are along in the process.

My Demonic influence will likely cease on 28/7.
Be sure to bring a bell, book and candle!
(and garlic to keep the vampire occupied)

My verdict is so far so good.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[jg...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, 25 June 2020 08:41:25 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 13/06/2020 11:46, jg....@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, 13 June 2020 09:12:32 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
> >
> >> I have a feeling that anyone who was really on the ball and moved
> >> very quickly after the first notification will be moved over on
> >> Monday 15/6 - if anyone was in that first wave please post your
> >> experience here.
> >>
> > I might be in that first wave, currently expecting my demon e-mail to
> > disappear 14th or 15th June.
>
> Did it?

Indeed it did, it is no more...
I had started diverting mail to another address whilst waiting for the new namesco hosted address to be setup, my crossover time before demise was brief but it seemed to be working fine.

> My new domain (held with 123-reg) is now linked successfully to
> their Microsoft365 mail service. The only bit of their procedure which
> assumes Outlook, Apple or other Mickeysoft mail product that I couldn't
> follow was the "don't whatever you do re-enter you password". I know
> that a fellow Demonite on a complex Apple setup also had fun making it
> go - nothing insurmountable but the FAQ doesn't cover all eventualities.
>

Yep, some of that password business was confusing, but it now seems so long ago...

cheers

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 02:41:00, "jg...@gmail.com" <jg....@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thursday, 25 June 2020 08:41:25 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 13/06/2020 11:46, jg....@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Saturday, 13 June 2020 09:12:32 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have a feeling that anyone who was really on the ball and moved
>> >> very quickly after the first notification will be moved over on
>> >> Monday 15/6 - if anyone was in that first wave please post your
>> >> experience here.
>> >>
>> > I might be in that first wave, currently expecting my demon e-mail to
>> > disappear 14th or 15th June.
>>
>> Did it?
>
>Indeed it did, it is no more...
>I had started diverting mail to another address whilst waiting for the
>new namesco hosted address to be setup, my crossover time before demise
>was brief but it seemed to be working fine.
>
>> My new domain (held with 123-reg) is now linked successfully to
>> their Microsoft365 mail service. The only bit of their procedure which
>> assumes Outlook, Apple or other Mickeysoft mail product that I couldn't
>> follow was the "don't whatever you do re-enter you password". I know

I interpret those warnings to mean they're changing the "username"
they're expecting, but keeping the password the same. Not made any
easier to follow because the "username" string they assign to you looks
like - well, is - an email address.

>> that a fellow Demonite on a complex Apple setup also had fun making it
>> go - nothing insurmountable but the FAQ doesn't cover all eventualities.
>>
>Yep, some of that password business was confusing, but it now seems so
>long ago...
>
>cheers

Question(s) for someone who stayed with Namesco for hosting of their new
domain, and has _had_ the change:
>
My friend bought her new domain with Namesco; she's currently receiving
emails to both the old and new email addresses.

She had asked Namesco to delay [I'm not sure what event], but - even
though they agreed - they actually did the change anyway a few weeks
back, but reverted them when she 'phoned them the following day. From
the (Turnpike Connect) log she sent me of the time it stopped working
when they changed it, it seems what happened was that the authentication
failed for the incoming and outgoing mailservers after the point when
they made the change. I'm _assuming_ that was because they changed the
username their mailservers were expecting - is that correct?

She's scheduled for the change to now happen on Thursday morning (2nd).

Am I correct, that the only _immediate_ change she will have to make _at
that point_ is a change of _username_ (what Turnpike calls "User name"
for one mailserver and "Mailbox" for the other), and that having made
that change, she will continue (until the end of August) to _receive_
emails to _both_ her old and new addresses, and be able to send emails
"From:" both too? Or will one or both of those die at changeover? (I
realise they'll definitely die at the end of August.)

(She doesn't have a website.)

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

... social media's tendency to knock on front doors and run away.
Andrew Collins, RT 2017/8/5-11

[Martin Brown]

Yes the login for mail server changes from myn...@nezumi.demon.co.uk to
myn...@mynewdomain.co.uk but the password remains unchanged.

I also tested sending to qwe...@mynewdomain.co.uk to ensure that it
bounced with an appropriate message and not postm...@nezumi.dcu.
(as happened to one of my friends)

The 365 admin login remains as whatever it was onmicrosoft.com which is
quite confusing and passwords carry over. Typically of the form:

admin@<yourdemonsubdomain>demononcascade.onmicrosft.com

Any aliasses predefined on the server as duplicated for the new domain.

Once you are happy everything is OK it is worth changing your passwords
since their admin tech team will clearly have had sight of them.

>
> She's scheduled for the change to now happen on Thursday morning (2nd).
>
> Am I correct, that the only _immediate_ change she will have to make _at
> that point_ is a change of _username_ (what Turnpike calls "User name"
> for one mailserver and "Mailbox" for the other), and that having made
> that change, she will continue (until the end of August) to _receive_
> emails to _both_ her old and new addresses, and be able to send emails
> "From:" both too? Or will one or both of those die at changeover? (I
> realise they'll definitely die at the end of August.)
>
> (She doesn't have a website.)

You might also have to sort the login authentication for the outgoing
SMTP server as well as for the incoming email on POP/IMAP. It is very
very Mickeysofty in terms of reporting bounce messages etc.

I am not sure how well Turnpike will accept Mickeysoft's lax
"interpretation" of the original internet standards.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 13:20:09, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 30/06/2020 12:36, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

[]

>> Question(s) for someone who stayed with Namesco for hosting of their
>>new domain, and has _had_ the change:
>>>
>> My friend bought her new domain with Namesco; she's currently

[]

>Yes the login for mail server changes from myn...@nezumi.demon.co.uk to
>myn...@mynewdomain.co.uk but the password remains unchanged.

(She's gone for a .net rather than a .co.uk, but that shouldn't make any
difference. [Same bit before .net as she had before DCU.])

>
>I also tested sending to qwe...@mynewdomain.co.uk to ensure that it
>bounced with an appropriate message and not postm...@nezumi.dcu.
>(as happened to one of my friends)

Do emails to nezumi.demon.co.uk still arrive after they change the
"username" their servers expect?

>
>The 365 admin login remains as whatever it was onmicrosoft.com which is
>quite confusing and passwords carry over. Typically of the form:
>
>admin@<yourdemonsubdomain>demononcascade.onmicrosft.com

Is that what Namesco call the "dashboard" or something like that?

How easy is it to set up a catchall - or to ask Namesco to do so? I
think my friend only ever used one email, but it seems a pity not to
utilise the facility. If it can be done very easily.

>
>Any aliasses predefined on the server as duplicated for the new domain.
>
>Once you are happy everything is OK it is worth changing your passwords
>since their admin tech team will clearly have had sight of them.
>> She's scheduled for the change to now happen on Thursday morning
>>(2nd).
>> Am I correct, that the only _immediate_ change she will have to make
>>_at that point_ is a change of _username_ (what Turnpike calls "User
>>name" for one mailserver and "Mailbox" for the other), and that
>>having made that change, she will continue (until the end of August)
>>to _receive_ emails to _both_ her old and new addresses, and be able
>>to send emails "From:" both too? Or will one or both of those die at
>>changeover? (I realise they'll definitely die at the end of August.)
>> (She doesn't have a website.)
>
>You might also have to sort the login authentication for the outgoing
>SMTP server as well as for the incoming email on POP/IMAP. It is very
>very Mickeysofty in terms of reporting bounce messages etc.
>
>I am not sure how well Turnpike will accept Mickeysoft's lax
>"interpretation" of the original internet standards.
>

She's already using stunnel, which someone (now not contactable) set up
for her some years ago; incoming is POP (I don't think Turnpike does
IMAP for incoming, though strangely it can be an IMAP server, probably
for small office situations). Reading through Namesco's instructions for
about half a dozen softwares (sadly not including Turnpike), I get the
impression the _only_ thing that has to be changed is the "username" (in
two places, one for each direction). So as she was already interacting
with their implementation of Microsoft's implementation of the standards
(!), I _hope_ she will continue to do so.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"We're plumbing shallows we didn't know existed here" - Jeremy Paxman (as
quizmaster of "University Challenge"), 1998 (when losing team suddenly put on a
spurt by showing knowledge of things like the Eurovision Song Contest ...)

[Martin Brown]

On 30/06/2020 19:52, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 13:20:09, Martin Brown
> <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 30/06/2020 12:36, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> []
>>>  Question(s) for someone who stayed with Namesco for hosting of their
>>> new  domain, and has _had_ the change:
>>>>
>>> My friend bought her new domain with Namesco; she's currently
> []
>> Yes the login for mail server changes from myn...@nezumi.demon.co.uk to
>> myn...@mynewdomain.co.uk but the password remains unchanged.
>
> (She's gone for a .net rather than a .co.uk, but that shouldn't make any
> difference. [Same bit before .net as she had before DCU.])
>>
>> I also tested sending to qwe...@mynewdomain.co.uk to ensure that it
>> bounced with an appropriate message and not postm...@nezumi.dcu.
>> (as happened to one of my friends)
>
> Do emails to nezumi.demon.co.uk still arrive after they change the
> "username" their servers expect?

Yes. The setup on cascade will accept every alias that there was on your
original .dcu setup to either the original .dcu address or .net address
until the next drop dead date for email services (presently 28/7).

Obviously you need to tell all contacts before that critical date. After
D-day I expect the nezumi subdomain will vanish - its fixed IP address
has already gone. (which I presume is the motivation for this)

>> The 365 admin login remains as whatever it was onmicrosoft.com which
>> is quite confusing and passwords carry over. Typically of the form:
>>
>> admin@<yourdemonsubdomain>demononcascade.onmicrosft.com
>
> Is that what Namesco call the "dashboard" or something like that?

Their dashboard is a bit of a mess - it still has relics of my previous
Demon email service with them which I think must have been cobbled
together in a hurry and never tidied up. To access the actual live mail
system on Namesco Demon (which is clearly subcontracted out) you go to

https://login.microsoftonline.com

And present the admin@somedomaindemononcascade ID and relevant password.
Then click the top right icon which might be your initials mine is MB.

After that you should see some info tabs down the side.

It looks a bit like the PR department in Dilbert - very minimalist,
unwelcoming, sparse and somewhat confusing. Hack around in there and you
can find the email alias list and alter it as required.

>
> How easy is it to set up a catchall - or to ask Namesco to do so? I
> think my friend only ever used one email, but it seems a pity not to
> utilise the facility. If it can be done very easily.

Not possible - but you can set a fairly large number of aliases. I think
someone here reported that they asked for one and it broke things badly.
(in this last month)

I haven't broken it's alias list and I now have double the entries I had
before. That can be thinned down once changeover occurs.

>> You might also have to sort the login authentication for the outgoing
>> SMTP server as well as for the incoming email on POP/IMAP. It is very
>> very Mickeysofty in terms of reporting bounce messages etc.
>>
>> I am not sure how well Turnpike will accept Mickeysoft's lax
>> "interpretation" of the original internet standards.
>>
> She's already using stunnel, which someone (now not contactable) set up
> for her some years ago; incoming is POP (I don't think Turnpike does
> IMAP for incoming, though strangely it can be an IMAP server, probably
> for small office situations). Reading through Namesco's instructions for
> about half a dozen softwares (sadly not including Turnpike), I get the
> impression the _only_ thing that has to be changed is the "username" (in
> two places, one for each direction). So as she was already interacting
> with their implementation of Microsoft's implementation of the standards
> (!), I _hope_ she will continue to do so.

The only gotcha might be that if her TP licence depends on the username
being of the form *.demon.co.uk life could get interesting. I understand
there is a workaround shim for that now but I had a universal license.

If all else fails you could suggest she moves to Thunderbird. The
transition is not that difficult and it does most things well enough.
The only TP feature I really miss are Unix like regex kill file rules.
I have never been able to make them work with any TB add-on.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Ruth E]

On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 10:05:09 AM UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 30/06/2020 19:52, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> > How easy is it to set up a catchall - or to ask Namesco to do so? I
> > think my friend only ever used one email, but it seems a pity not to
> > utilise the facility. If it can be done very easily.
>
> Not possible - but you can set a fairly large number of aliases. I think
> someone here reported that they asked for one and it broke things badly.
> (in this last month)

Microsoft 365 does have a limit on the number of aliases you can have (as I discovered in 2016, when I tried to transfer my 500-odd dcu aliases across to Namesco). In 2016, the limit was 200, although I think it may now be 400. However, there is a workaround if you need more, utilising shared mailboxes:

1) Create a shared mailbox in MS 365 admin center. (no additional license required)
2) Assign yourself as the only member of that shared mailbox.
3) Enable email forwarding for that shared mailbox, and set the forwarding to your primary address (same one that the other aliases all point to).
4) Disable storing a copy of the message in that shared mailbox (to avoid affecting storage limits).
5) Create (up to 400?) additional email aliases for that shared mailbox
6) Repeat as necessary

Regards, Ruth

[Martin Brown]

Hi Ruth,

Thanks for the tip. It could come in handy one day.

I think they may have doubled that number from 200 which I was close to
with my alias list so that things don't break during the transition.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 10:05:07, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 30/06/2020 19:52, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

[]

>> Do emails to nezumi.demon.co.uk still arrive after they change the
>>"username" their servers expect?
>
>Yes. The setup on cascade will accept every alias that there was on
>your original .dcu setup to either the original .dcu address or .net
>address until the next drop dead date for email services (presently
>28/7).

Thanks - that's a relief. (Obviously temporary.)

AIUI, Namesco aren't going to do anything else after changing the
username their servers expect; I think the 28th is the last date they're
letting any user postpone that until. I think the date after that is
2020-9-1 - or possibly -8-31 - when the .DCUs will disappear (maybe with
slight delay for DNS or whatever to propagate round the world - or is
that only minutes?), but that's not down to Namesco.

>
>Obviously you need to tell all contacts before that critical date.
>After D-day I expect the nezumi subdomain will vanish - its fixed IP
>address has already gone. (which I presume is the motivation for this)

Interesting. Yes, I'm assuming it's the reason too, not just the use of
a domain name.

>
>>> The 365 admin login remains as whatever it was onmicrosoft.com which
>>>is quite confusing and passwords carry over. Typically of the form:
>>>
>>> admin@<yourdemonsubdomain>demononcascade.onmicrosft.com
>> Is that what Namesco call the "dashboard" or something like that?
>
>Their dashboard is a bit of a mess - it still has relics of my previous
>Demon email service with them which I think must have been cobbled
>together in a hurry and never tidied up. To access the actual live mail
>system on Namesco Demon (which is clearly subcontracted out) you go to
>
>https://login.microsoftonline.com
>
>And present the admin@somedomaindemononcascade ID and relevant
>password. Then click the top right icon which might be your initials
>mine is MB.
>
>After that you should see some info tabs down the side.
>
>It looks a bit like the PR department in Dilbert - very minimalist,
>unwelcoming, sparse and somewhat confusing. Hack around in there and
>you can find the email alias list and alter it as required.

Thanks. Sounds a bit beyond me - and certainly beyond my ability to
instruct someone nervous to do, down the telephone! Still, marked Keep
for future reference.

>> How easy is it to set up a catchall - or to ask Namesco to do so? I
>>think my friend only ever used one email, but it seems a pity not to
>>utilise the facility. If it can be done very easily.
>
>Not possible - but you can set a fairly large number of aliases. I
>think someone here reported that they asked for one and it broke things
>badly.
>(in this last month)

Yes, I saw that - apparently it broke _outgoing_! Which seemed
incomprehensible to me, until someone suggested it could happen if
they're using the same server for incoming and outgoing mail. Pretty
incompetent, though.

>
>I haven't broken it's alias list and I now have double the entries I
>had before. That can be thinned down once changeover occurs.
>
>>> You might also have to sort the login authentication for the
>>>outgoing SMTP server as well as for the incoming email on POP/IMAP.
>>>It is very very Mickeysofty in terms of reporting bounce messages etc.
>>>
>>> I am not sure how well Turnpike will accept Mickeysoft's lax
>>>"interpretation" of the original internet standards.
>>>
>> She's already using stunnel, which someone (now not contactable) set
>>up for her some years ago; incoming is POP (I don't think Turnpike
>>does IMAP for incoming, though strangely it can be an IMAP server,
>>probably for small office situations). Reading through Namesco's
>>instructions for about half a dozen softwares (sadly not including
>>Turnpike), I get the impression the _only_ thing that has to be
>>changed is the "username" (in two places, one for each direction). So
>>as she was already interacting with their implementation of
>>Microsoft's implementation of the standards (!), I _hope_ she will continue to do so.
>
>The only gotcha might be that if her TP licence depends on the username
>being of the form *.demon.co.uk life could get interesting. I
>understand there is a workaround shim for that now but I had a
>universal license.

I'm pretty sure Eileen has a paid-for one anyway, but that's not how the
limitation on the free version worked: it worked by doing a special
handshake with a server at Demon - if the handshake didn't happen, it
wouldn't - I'm not sure what, send and receive email I think. The
workaround happened in two steps: first, someone cracked what the
special handshake expected and some very kind person set up a server
that did the same handshake (users - of the free version - just had to
set a line in their hosts file to point to the kind person's server
instead of the Demon one; fortunately it was coded into Turnpike as a
name not an IP address). The later version of the workaround was a
version of that server that you ran on your own machine. (Though when I
asked - sometime this year I think - the kind person was still running
the server, and it was still getting a few calls!)

>
>If all else fails you could suggest she moves to Thunderbird. The
>transition is not that difficult and it does most things well enough.

She was actually considering that - towards the end of last year, I
think; as she's not at all computerate, and also I think nervous, that
would have been a big thing. Then the Demon Demise came along - and she
most certainly doesn't want to do both at once. (Saving effort, as might
have actually been the case, notwithstanding.) And certainly not
remotely!

I think the main concern was - is - the transfer of old emails and the
address book. Plenty of discussion on DIST about those.

>The only TP feature I really miss are Unix like regex kill file rules.
>I have never been able to make them work with any TB add-on.
>

Unlikely to be a problem for Eileen - I doubt she has any kill rules.
(She doesn't even use TP's news facility - though I see from the logs
she sent me that she is still connecting to the demon news server, which
is actually still responding! [Though failing at the authentication
stage.])

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Practicall every British actor with a bus pass is in there ...
Barry Norman (on "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" [2011]), RT 2015/12/12-18

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 13:50:57, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 01/07/2020 13:00, Ruth E wrote:
>> On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 10:05:09 AM UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> On 30/06/2020 19:52, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>> How easy is it to set up a catchall - or to ask Namesco to do so? I

[]

>> Microsoft 365 does have a limit on the number of aliases you can
>>have (as I discovered in 2016, when I tried to transfer my 500-odd dcu
>>aliases across to Namesco). In 2016, the limit was 200, although I
>>think it may now be 400. However, there is a workaround if you need
>>more, utilising shared mailboxes:

[]

>Thanks for the tip. It could come in handy one day.

Same here - saved for reference.

>
>I think they may have doubled that number from 200 which I was close to
>with my alias list so that things don't break during the transition.
>

Unlikely to be a problem for the person I'm helping; I think Eileen has
only ever used a single email, and even if I were to persuade her of the
usefulness of having several, I doubt she'd ever use as many as ten.

However, I would say that choosing such a system makes Namesco claiming
to offer domain hosting rather dodgy: one of the aspects of having a
domain is, surely, that you _can_ give out emails with absolutely
anything (within the RFCs, so not @, spaces, and a few others) before
the "@", and expect emails to them to be receivable. Using a system that
requires each one to be set up, and limits the total altogether, is
surely not really fit for purpose.

(I seem to be able to use anything I like with mine: I certainly don't
need to tell tsohost [my hosting and email provider] when I invent a new
one.)

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If it's nice to look at and it makes you feel good, it's art. - Grayson Perry,
interviewed in Radio Times 12-18 October 2013

[Ruth E]

On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 6:13:28 PM UTC+1, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> However, I would say that choosing such a system makes Namesco claiming
> to offer domain hosting rather dodgy: one of the aspects of having a
> domain is, surely, that you _can_ give out emails with absolutely
> anything (within the RFCs, so not @, spaces, and a few others) before
> the "@", and expect emails to them to be receivable. Using a system that
> requires each one to be set up, and limits the total altogether, is
> surely not really fit for purpose.

When we moved to Namesco in 2016, they were offering 'unlimited addresses' with their package, so I was extremely unhappy to find that there was actually a limit of 200 aliases. But that proved to be a (very new at the time) Microsoft 365 limit - nothing to do with Namesco. And fortunately I then found the shared mailbox workaround.

At the time I was also very unhappy about losing my Demon catch-all setup, and having to manually set up 400+ aliases in MS 365. But I now prefer it, and wouldn't go back to catch-all, as it allows me to delete aliases which start receiving a lot of spam.

Regards, Ruth

[Andy]

In message <rdhjk3$1b7t$2...@gioia.aioe.org>, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote
[]

>It looks a bit like the PR department in Dilbert - very minimalist,
>unwelcoming, sparse and somewhat confusing.

Screen cleaner, please.
--
Andy Taylor [President, Treasurer & Editor of the Austrian Philatelic Society].
Visit www dot austrianphilately dot com