Re: [dmarc-discuss] Why do I receive RUAs for emails that align?

Jim Popovitch wrote: > The difficulty I have is exactly as you described. I received a > DMARC report that says there is a DKIM failure, but what is not clear > is whether or not the email was "quite possibly not tested or > recorded". That DMARC report is pointless without knowing more. You

Re: [dmarc-discuss] Why do I receive RUAs for emails that align?

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 5:31 PM, A. Schulze via dmarc-discuss wrote: > > > Am 01.02.2017 um 15:11 schrieb Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss: >> I'm running postfix and AFAIK it's only sending 7bit. >> >> postfix postscreen >> postfix smtpD >> postfix

Re: [dmarc-discuss] Why do I receive RUAs for emails that align?

Am 01.02.2017 um 15:11 schrieb Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss: > I'm running postfix and AFAIK it's only sending 7bit. > > postfix postscreen > postfix smtpD > postfix local -> mailman > mailman 8bit -> postfix:587 pickup > postfix cleanup (converts

Re: [dmarc-discuss] Why do I receive RUAs for emails that align?

On 2017 Jan 31, 21:14, Jim Popovitch wrote: > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Peter Gonzalez wrote: > > > So what exactly did you do to "roll out additional DMARC support" in > > your Mailman setup? > > Mailman has historically done some funky things with moderator/owner > notifications.

Re: [dmarc-discuss] Why do I receive RUAs for emails that align?

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 6:50 AM, A. Schulze via dmarc-discuss wrote: > > Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss: > >> I'd bet a few beers that the DKIM failures are due to those companies >> injecting inbound msg headers before processing DMARC checks. > > > an other option: the

Re: [dmarc-discuss] Why do I receive RUAs for emails that align?

Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss: I'd bet a few beers that the DKIM failures are due to those companies injecting inbound msg headers before processing DMARC checks. an other option: the MX server don't announce 8BITMIME. You send 8-BIT and your sending MTA recode down to 7-BIT. DKIM

Re: [dmarc-discuss] opendkim-atpszone reproducibility and examples

SheridanJ West via dmarc-discuss wrote: > I only have the mismatch problem with opendmarc-reports and thats using > most of the command line options. > > Normal email (port 587) is matched with spf,dkim and dmarc.Please do > not consider our email servers as mentally retarded in regard to

Re: [dmarc-discuss] opendkim-atpszone reproducibility and examples

I only have the mismatch problem with opendmarc-reports and thats using most of the command line options. Normal email (port 587) is matched with spf,dkim and dmarc.Please do not consider our email servers as mentally retarded in regard to that. Hence my posting on a dmarc list. report

Re: [dmarc-discuss] opendkim-atpszone reproducibility and examples

SheridanJ West via dmarc-discuss wrote: > i appear to need atps records for google this is with atps dns text records > and probably others > > opendmarc-reports: sent report for gmail.com to mailauth-repo...@google.com > (2.0.0 Ok: queued as x1) > > without atps [results i got from last week] > >