🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2tnq0k$7g9@lace.colorado.edu>,
Jason Ornstein <ornstein@cs.colorado.edu> wrote:
>>In order to bypass this and let the provider store the mail, send your 
>>mail to cslaw%pericles.com@psi.net.
>>
>>The provider has common sense and will become upset if they have to pay 
>>the consequences.
>
>Laugh.  They must fear the wrath of the net :-)
>
>It doesn't look like pericles.com is doing so well at the moment 
>anyway....
>
>nordsieck % telnet pericles.com 25
>Trying 199.98.145.1...
>telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused

They are only connected occasionally.   Its a slip line. 
Anyway, guys, if you notice them connected, make sure you do not run a number
of pings with very large packet sizes.  That could really bog down their
slow little slip connection, and isn't a nice thing to do.
Please don't read the man page for ping and find out that the packed size
is given on the command line after the host, and can be quite large.  That
would be very nasty.  :-)

>Bummer if you can't send them mail.  It would be interesting to 
>find out why it isn't working.  Also, don't bohter to finger or 
>telnet to the machine as those are blocked, and probably a whole
>bunch of other ports too.

Mail works, but they are missing a secondary mx record, hence if they aren't
connected it will be queued up locally.