Dos_Box Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 (edited) I know this has been mentioned in the LGfL thread but perhaps deserves it's own discussion:Budget broadband deal emails hidden from London schools - BBC News Choosing a broadband supplier is an important decision for any school. But schools across London are being prevented from receiving emails from a company that wants to compete for their broadband contract. London Grid for Learning - the council organisation which negotiates broadband contracts for 2,500 schools in the capital - has admitted that it is blocking emails from Exa Networks, a firm which supplies a similar service." It'a got some very interesting and relevant points, especially regarding paying for services you don't use. When I worked for Lancs NGfL it was getting to the stage where they were trying to be all things to everyone (which, being fair, some smaller schools without onsite IT may have needed) but once the NGfL funding got pulled schools were faced with very large broadband bill increases. Now, these bills weren't just for the connectivity but for all of the other services (such as centralised filtering, email, web hosting etc.) as well. These days though, most of this can be had possibly for better and cheaper elsewhere with a bit of shopping around. It would be good to get some feedback on how schools found it once they broke free of their RBC in terms of cost and services they actually needed so any feedback is welcome. Edited October 27, 2015 by robk
sparkeh Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 We left the embc during their transition to emPSN at the time our LA funding was pulled. Seeing the true cost of being a member was certainly an eye opener, especially when larger secondary schools saw how much they were subsisting the smaller primaries. Taking into account the cost, the services we were paying for that we didn't use, the dreadful customer service/support and the confusing model of suppliers that replaced the one supplier model, moving away was a no brainer. Honestly we haven't looked back, we moved to a faster, more reliable connection and more flexible filtering for with a significant cost saving. Not being dictated to by the LA was a bonus as well Regarding the LGfL blocking competitors emails: is that legal?
FN-GM Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 Regarding the LGfL blocking competitors emails: is that legal? It certainly sounds like its an abuse of trust. However was it deliberate? Maybe these where general marketing email getting stuck in the filter? Ours stops quite a number!
sparkeh Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 It certainly sounds like its an abuse of trust. However was it deliberate? Maybe these where general marketing email getting stuck in the filter? Ours stops quite a number! True it might not be deliberate but coupled with the reports of the other tactics they are using to get schools to sign up, it doesn't look good.
Edu-IT Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 It certainly sounds like its an abuse of trust. However was it deliberate? Maybe these where general marketing email getting stuck in the filter? Ours stops quite a number! You'd think they would have solved it, before it got to press, if it was an error...
Arreks Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 I find it really unlikely to be an accident tbh, in the past 2 years every single advertising email I've received hasn't been blocked unless it was obvious spam. I'd like to see what the emails exa sent looked like!
birchanger Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 Not if a competitor was the one to take it to the press, which is whats seems tio have happened.
EXA_Mark Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 Without getting into specifics, the emails were sent to schools only who we had spoken to over the past couple of years and who asked for more information nearer the time of the contract renewal. The emails were simply offering the schools a quote to compare against their present supplier, or to meet with one of our account managers or partners. We sent a total of just over 700 emails. We did not target all of LGFL's schools. That is not how we work. We also contacted LGFL on the 1st October about this by email, phone and in writing. As of now all of our emails, regardless of content, are classified by them as SPAM. LGFL were and are absolutely aware of this. The mostly commonly recognised way of SPAM filtering is to look at on a per email basis, not at an overall domain level. Could you imagine what impact it would have on people if you decide to block generic domains such as Gmail, Outlook or such. Email providers will use a multitude of resources to help classify spam, and of course use DBL's to look for blocked IPs. You do not simply block a whole domain and leave it blocked. 2
Edu-IT Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 Of course you could tell if it was being detected as spam - based on content - by sending from a different domain and seeing whether that arrives which I guess you've done.
FN-GM Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 The mostly commonly recognised way of SPAM filtering is to look at on a per email basis, not at an overall domain level. Could you imagine what impact it would have on people if you decide to block generic domains such as Gmail, Outlook or such. Email providers will use a multitude of resources to help classify spam, and of course use DBL's to look for blocked IPs. You do not simply block a whole domain and leave it blocked. @exa_mark You may have been blacklisted by the spam software automatically. Your domain Reverse DNS does not match SMTP Banner. Spam filters increasing the likelihood of the messages being marked as spam, they might have a super sensitive filter. I don't work for the London Grid or have anything to do with it. But I think we should be careful about jumping to conclusions. What does the Warning – Reverse DNS does not match SMTP Banner mean? – SMTP Diagnostic Tool | MxToolbox Blog 1
synaesthesia Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 Even without the blacklisting of the emails, that letter/email is absolutely out of order. I can only hope it got someone sacked - I wouldn't EVER trust a company spouting crap like that! I mean look on these forums - we have countless competitors who behave in an excellent professional manner and remain thoroughly "sportsmanlike" despite being in direct competition. The likes of Millgate, Haptic, VeryPC, Bromcom and Capita, Exa, Schools Broadband etc etc all coexist, joke with eachother and get along just fine without resorting to childishness like that! 3
EXA_Mark Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 @exa_mark You may have been blacklisted by the spam software automatically. Your domain Reverse DNS does not match SMTP Banner. Spam filters increasing the likelihood of the messages being marked as spam, they might have a super sensitive filter. I don't work for the London Grid or have anything to do with it. But I think we should be careful about jumping to conclusions. What does the Warning – Reverse DNS does not match SMTP Banner mean? – SMTP Diagnostic Tool | MxToolbox Blog Thanks for that FN-GM, If only it was that simple. No they told us exactly why they blocked us, which is what the story was about. It was the BBC's story not Exa's and they investigated and interviewed all concerned, so really not a case of jumping to conclusions at all. The diagnostic tool you link is correct, except that you are checking our inbound MX not the outbound which is where our email is sent from. PTR is correct on outbound.
FN-GM Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 Thanks for that FN-GM, If only it was that simple. No they told us exactly why they blocked us, which is what the story was about. It was the BBC's story not Exa's and they investigated and interviewed all concerned, so really not a case of jumping to conclusions at all. Ah well then I stand corrected. Its an abuse of power simple as!
Edu-IT Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 I wonder who else is being blocked? Would such information be available through a FOI request?
synaesthesia Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 I can only hope that they have inadvertently used their own marketing to drive people away to get better value for money and less abuse elsewhere.
kevin_lane Posted October 28, 2015 Posted October 28, 2015 It is a shame that companies have to go low in order to keep in business. their is nothing wrong a healthy competition and people who are the decision makers like my self should be given the choice and not to have the hand forced. Surely if LGfl have thought that their services are the most competitive in price and that their services are excellent then people would stay with them and by doing what they have done (if proven right)about the blocking emails then I wouldn't be surprised if they lose alot of customers because of this.
Wave9_Lee Posted October 28, 2015 Posted October 28, 2015 Having worked in that environment for many years, this isn't unusual behaviour. Grids and LA's are coming to the realisation that they need to operate in a commercial world, and finding the transition difficult. Competition is all part of the game, and ultimately, good for the customer and the market as a whole. 1
GrumbleDook Posted October 28, 2015 Posted October 28, 2015 To be honest, and I have shared this with the Exa employee involved, there are lots of ways stuff gets caught and I really do find that the news article is blatantly bashing without having all the facts (which no-one does it seems). I've sat on that side of the fence, the same as Dos_Box, and seen emails get marked as spam. I've seen some folk get mightily upset about it and accuse individuals (including me) of doing it on purpose ... when it has been automated systems doing the blocking. Without knowing the LGfL infrastructure, there are a number of ways where emails in other locations would get the domain (or sending servers) blocked. It happens ... it is a pain to root out the cause and sometimes it is a fine point that the use of RBLs is a double-edged sword. You get this with large scale web filters too, where a site gets blocked because of a recategorisation. Heck, EduGeek was blocked in 4 RBCs for several months at one point (in spite of some of the RBC staff trying to stop it from happening) and it took intervention at a senior level to sort! I tend to prefer Hanlon's Law - Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Some of that stupidity is the way IT systems work ... Do I think that there should be more competition? Yes ... but I also think that schools should be educated about the choices they make and the educational benefits they get from those choices. At the moment there is no-one truly independent in this ... and high pressure sales (which comes from all sides) is a problem, not just for broadband but for other areas too.
synaesthesia Posted October 28, 2015 Posted October 28, 2015 Absolutely agreed however there's definitely a difference between the supposed spam blacklisting which isn't an uncommon occurrence - hell, even Microsoft's gotten more than half of it's email servers blacklisted plenty of times - and employees telling schools they will not get better in an unprofessional manner. The latter can at least be proven (has it, btw?). Won't be the first time a plonker of an employee has put their foot in it in such a way!
GrumbleDook Posted October 28, 2015 Posted October 28, 2015 To be honest, if I had sent something like that out I would have been carpeted by the NCC Chief Exec and the DCS. I know we put out some interesting stuff at times .. but that one was just bizarre. The lack of logos, links, etc also makes me query the authenticity ... but no-one has turned round and slammed it yet so ...
EXA_Mark Posted October 28, 2015 Posted October 28, 2015 To be honest, and I have shared this with the Exa employee involved, there are lots of ways stuff gets caught and I really do find that the news article is blatantly bashing without having all the facts (which no-one does it seems). Sent you a PM Tony. 1
SchoolsBroadband Posted October 30, 2015 Posted October 30, 2015 and a follow up about it School broadband - rich pickings? - BBC News
kevin_lane Posted October 30, 2015 Posted October 30, 2015 Sounds very iffy to me that does or is that it just me
Opendium_Steve Posted October 30, 2015 Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) I'm not terribly surprised to see aggressive tactics to keep schools using the LEA systems. We saw similar things in Hants a couple of years ago - very threatening behavior towards schools who were interested in leaving the county WAN, and lots of misinformation being thrown around in an effort to make them stay. I'm sad to say that it worked in a number of cases - we had several prospective customers who were put back in line by the LEA at the last minute. Given that @exa_mark says the LGfL were informed about the emails being blocked several weeks ago and nothing was done about it, it seems fairly clear that LGfL has either been intentionally blocking competitor's emails, or at the very least they have been negligent. False positives are a fact of life in spam filtering, but there is no excuse for not bothering to fix the problem once aware of it. Irrespective of LGfL's actions, the letter from Ealing council is downright unprofessional and aggressive and I hope the people responsible have been disciplined. LEAs should be treating schools as valued parts of the community who are empowered to make their own decisions, not subordinates who can be ordered around to meet the whims of the council. [Edit: I notice the original article has now been updated to mention that the council worker who wrote that letter also happens to be a director of LGfL, so there's a conflict of interest if ever I saw one!] The service offered by the various grids and LEAs around the country is quite variable - some are absolutely excellent, whilst some seem to try and get away with doing the bare minimum. At the end of the day, the schools themselves are the ones dealing directly with both the students and the technology. They are the ones who understand what is important, what needs improving and what they need help with. It is the responsibility of all of the organisations, whether they be the local grid, LEA or private companies such as ourselves, @SchoolsBroadband, @exa_mark, etc. to ensure the schools have good information and the freedom of choice to do what is right for them. The kind of strong arm tactics and misinformation that we _do_ see occasionally to force schools one way or the other are unacceptable and those involved should be shamed very publicly every time it happens. Edited October 30, 2015 by Opendium_Steve 2
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now