I send an email from what's technically a UUNET account (but is really an
Ozemail dial-in and Ozemail mail server) to my personal Ozemail account and
then Access One sends me an email telling me my email is too big?
I've had people tell me that their email to me is bouncing back, now I know
why.
The first question is why is Access One processing email that was sent to
the same server used by both sender and recipient (same state, same dialin)?
It would be a possible email route for externally originated email but
ridiculous for what is essentially a single server internal email.
Why is Ozemail still be operating the Access One mail servers, didn't Aone
get acquired a couple of years ago? Haven't they finished the migration yet,
or is this an indication on how long the legacy Ozemail business customers
will have to wait to be migrated to UUNet (as claimed would happen by Mr
Milne)?
The real question is why and when did Ozemail reduce the email size limit?
The Ozemail mail limit has NEVER been as low as 1.5MB. During the past 6
years I've regularly received emails as large as 2.5MB. Why the sudden
unannounced reduction?
Sounds like another hidden cut in services to save spending money on a
needed upgrade to the mail server, this time to ease the burden on the mail
servers while Ozemail try to squeeze more people through it.
I wonder what changes UUNet and Ozemail have made that impacts on business
customers who use them as an email gateway? I hope they aren't implementing
unannounced changes that restrict their ability to trade.
Once again, I don't expect any response from Ozemail. They may read this NG
but they have no intention of addressing anyones concerns or notifying us of
any changes. They seem to enjoy making our lives difficult.
The Raven
It is being looked into and I'm running my own tests.
> this STINKS
> and i am going to be contactin the TIO about ozemail changing service
> levels and not anouncing them to the customers.
The person who contacted me claimed that no reduction in size limits had
occurred, but that is not to say that a server somewhere may have been
accidently configured lower.
> i signed up for a full
> service ISP, i was told that as lontg as an email was not larger then the
> mail boxes capacity it could be recived, and that capacity was advised as
> 5meg, with excess going to an "overflow" box.
The overflow goes to mail2.ozemail.com.au IIRC.
>
> >Sounds like another hidden cut in services to save spending money on a
> >needed upgrade to the mail server, this time to ease the burden on the
> mail
> >servers while Ozemail try to squeeze more people through it.
> >
>
>
> yep, barring a rapidly forthcoming alternative explanation from
> ozemail/uunet/mci worldcom then we can only assume that they have.
Well, I'm willing to give them a break at the moment becuase they actually
contacted me, and quite promptly to. If you want, why not run some of your
own tests? At least we'd have some customer generated results. I'm running
tests myself.
> >I wonder what changes UUNet and Ozemail have made that impacts on
business
> >customers who use them as an email gateway? I hope they aren't
> implementing
> >unannounced changes that restrict their ability to trade.
> >
>
>
> well this will effect my artwork if this is true, as i said i have a
> forthcoming need to start sending and reciveing large email attachments.
>
I agree that we should have the ability to send the ocaisonal large email
but if someone was going to be doing on a regular basis, perhaps FTP would
be better. Of course, FTP may not be practical for some uses.
[snip]
>
> well i am off to the TIO and am changing service providers within the next
> two weeks as this is not the way any competent ISP operates. see ya later
> ozemail, it was nice while it lasted.
Did you see the TIO rep on TV this morning? He was saying that the amount of
complaints regarding Telcos and ISPs are getting too large for the TIO to
manage. He said that the Telcos and ISPs could avoid a lot of problems if
they simply focused on providing service to their customers. To me, that
suggests they should be treating their customers with the same level of
grovelling and concern that they lavish on their investors.
The Raven
The Raven
<king...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:uokotsgc3i95ab0gj...@4ax.com...
> 'Twas a dark and stormy night on Thu, 5 Oct 2000 12:00:19 +1000 as "The
Raven"
> <ws...@crosswinds.net> took time out from the neverending quest to rid the
world
> of grues and wrote:
>
> > The real question is why and when did Ozemail reduce the email size
limit?
> > The Ozemail mail limit has NEVER been as low as 1.5MB. During the past 6
> > years I've regularly received emails as large as 2.5MB. Why the sudden
> > unannounced reduction?
>
> 1.5 meg? That sucks shit. Ozemail, you are gunna go down the gurgler!
>
>
> Catchya
>
> http://www.ozemail.com.au/~kingpin1
>
> > The home of #The-Pit <
>
> > Home of the Aussie Dropbear Page <
i noticed that, must have happened when the "improved" server came online.
probably does not support that level of flexibility or they just could not
be bothered customizing it. i can hardly believe it was a deliberate idea,
i will have to be a little more guarded in what i say here now its being
broadcast to the wider web. very strange.
on the subject of news servers recently posts i made over 2 weeks age have
been turning up as new unread messages and replies to those posts that are
similar age are also appearing, one thread dated the 17 of last month
appeared yesterday. very strange, wonder if it is the server or my reader,
coincidentally i had just compacted the things files for the first time in
several days<maybe even two weeks>
i seem to have diagnosed one of the "bandwidth" problems in wollongong, it
seems that there is aq faulty modem, as when i get the slow thruput most of
the time if i hang up and reconnect it gets better, still a little
congestion during the after school peak in the weekday afternoons but much
better most of the time.
ant
No, it seems to be more recent than that. I've yet to confirm when deja
started archiving.
> probably does not support that level of flexibility or they just could not
> be bothered customizing it.
Sounds like someone forgot when doing some modifications.
> i can hardly believe it was a deliberate idea,
> i will have to be a little more guarded in what i say here now its being
> broadcast to the wider web. very strange.
The more paranoid amongst us may think it was done intentionally as a trap.
>
> on the subject of news servers recently posts i made over 2 weeks age have
> been turning up as new unread messages and replies to those posts that are
> similar age are also appearing, one thread dated the 17 of last month
> appeared yesterday. very strange, wonder if it is the server or my reader,
> coincidentally i had just compacted the things files for the first time in
> several days<maybe even two weeks>
I haven't purged my OE reader since 1/1/2000, although I have compacted.
While OE does occaisionally hickup on picking up new posts etc, the amount
of missing/delayed posts has been much higher than normal.
>
> i seem to have diagnosed one of the "bandwidth" problems in wollongong, it
> seems that there is aq faulty modem, as when i get the slow thruput most
of
> the time if i hang up and reconnect it gets better, still a little
> congestion during the after school peak in the weekday afternoons but much
> better most of the time.
>
>
>
>
> ant
>
>
--
The Raven (President of the ozemail.* NG's)
** Leanne: "I *am* sick ..... and no-one there [work]
** even knows what Usenet is!"
** Raven : "Oh, you work for Ozemail then?"
**
** Zak: "*somewhere* there's some poor bastard on
** a 300 baud connection"
** Raven: "Oh, you mean Ozemail support staff?"