People are always telling us what to do. Have a nice day! Have a good one!
Enjoy! Y'all come back now!
-----Original Message-----
From: James Howard via Af
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:05 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
There you go telling us what to do again!
From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+james=litewire....@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul
McCall via Af
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 8:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
IGNORE - unless you want a job
-----Original Message-----
From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+paulm=pdmnet....@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken
Hohhof via Af
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:06 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
I was thinking if the connection is using TLS, then connection caching
wouldn't work anyway. But it seems I was misreading that Postfix document,
it seems to say Postfix would not re-use the connection, but another MTA
with a different software architecture maybe could.
-----Original Message-----
From: George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 7:57 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
Yes, TLS, and it has been this way since like.. ever. More years than I can
remember anyway. What is/was Beehive running on, Qmail? Looking through my
logs, coming from Beehive it was TLS as well. Coming from WISPA is TLS, too.
What MTA is WISPA running?
The Postfix TLS/connection caching thing could be the problem. Maybe they're
trying to hold the session open to deliver more messages? That seems like a
Postfix problem to me. But that doesn't make sense because in all (normal)
instances (WISPA, Beehive AF, Amazon AF), messages are coming in for each
recipient (me and Mike are on the same lists) separately. Separate message
ID and SMTP session for each recipient per message. The only thing different
with Amazon is they seem to "forget"
to send a QUIT once in a while which Exim on my end says violates RFC, so
whichever Amazon outbound MX it happens to be at the moment gets connection
rate limited for bad commands.
I see tons and tons of connection rate limiting 'because of notquit:
command-timeout' in my log all from obvious spam hosts, besides the Amazon
SES hosts anyway. So I do not want to ignore bad commands for obvious
reasons.
I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong. But other messages for other Amazon
services is doing the same thing. It's not just this list. It's Amazon.
Maybe they're dropping the connection early without sending a QUIT because
they are configured for impatience? I don't know.
On 9/17/2014 5:48 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:
George, are the SMTP connections to your mailserver using TLS? The
reason I ask has to do with SMTP connection caching.
http://www.postfix.org/CONNECTION_CACHE_README.html
-----Original Message----- From: George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)
via Af
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 5:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
In my case, it's not exactly greylisting, but something is happening
on Amazon's end that causing them to terminate SMTP sessions too early
or something like that. Overloading perhaps? Them not sending QUIT
seems to be the issue. RFCs say that's how you end a session. So
whatever, delayed. Meh. I'm not changing my end because we already get
enough crap. And because this is Exim & SpamAssassin on cPanel/WHM,
almost everything happens at the initial SMTP connection: RBL checks,
host rate limit checks, etc. As I said before, this wasn't happening
when AF was on Beehive's servers and it's not happening with the WISPA
lists.
I'm not trying to be bitchy or nitpicky, just trying to help Paul and
Curtis understand what's happening from my POV.
On 9/17/2014 5:20 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:
Received here at 11:59:41.
Jay, I would look for something specific to your situation.
Either Amazon just doesn't like you, or if you are doing greylisting,
I would look at that as a possible cause.
Greylisting defers delivery on purpose, forces the sending MTA to
queue the message, and usually relies on the next attempt looking
exactly the same including source IP. Amazon may not use the same
source IP, it may come from a pool of MTAs. Big systems that do
greylisting may incorporate a mechanism to learn what IP ranges
belong to the same organization, but you may not have that level of
sophistication.
Or probably I'm completely out in left field, but I can't think why I
would get every single email within a second or so, yet yours are
being delayed hours.
My mailserver is on a Rube Goldberg connection due to a previous
storm (it's at my house on an EoIP tunnel over AT&T U-Verse), so it's
not like I have a particularly speedy setup.
-----Original Message----- From: CBB - Jay Fuller via Af
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 4:12 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
written 11:59 am , received 3:22 pm
(Fyi)
----- Original Message ----- From: Mathew Howard via Af
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
I don't like fried pickles.
________________________________________
From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] on behalf of
James Howard via Af
[af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:30 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
It seems to be bordering on libelous for someone to accuse us of not
being able to stay on topic.
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller
via Af
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:16 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
mmmmm. fried pickles.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jay Weekley via Af
To:
af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com><mailto:af@afmug.com><mailto:af@afmug.com%3e>
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] TEST - IGNORE
I like pickles. Does anyone else?
Adam Moffett via Af wrote:
>
> Test messages here never get ignored. Expect at least 4 replies
saying > whether you passed or failed and possibly a hijack that
turns the test > thread into some other conversation.
> (maybe this one is the hijack)
>
>>
>> Paul McCall, Pres.
>> PDMNet / Florida Broadband
>> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>> 772-564-6800 office
>> 772-473-0352 cell
>>
www.pdmnet.com<http://www.pdmnet.com/><http://www.pdmnet.com/%3e><http://www.pdmnet.com/%3e><http://www.pdmnet.com/%3e%3e>
>>
pa...@pdmnet.net<mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net><mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net><mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net%3e><mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net><mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net%3e><ma
ilto:pa...@pdmnet.net%3e><mailto:ilto:pa...@pdmnet.net%3e%3e>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________
Total Control Panel
Login<https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net><https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net%3e>
To:
ja...@litewire.net<mailto:ja...@litewire.net><https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=2
42260993&domain=litewire.net>
From:
00000148842f45a9-e2dfdede-8f87-4a01-83b3-7d51bc808b65-000000@amazonse<mailto:00000148842f45a9-e2dfdede-8f87-4a01-83b3-7d51bc808b65-000000@amazonse>
s.com<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=2603669244&dom
ain=litewire.net>
Message Score: 2
High (60): Pass
My Spam Blocking Level: High
Medium (75): Pass
Low (90): Pass
Block<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&bl-sender-address=
1&rID=242260993&aID=2603669244&domain=litewire.net>
this sender /
Block<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&ent=1&bl-sender-ad
dress=1&rID=242260993&aID=2603669244&domain=litewire.net>
this sender enterprise-wide
Block<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&bl-sender-domain=1
&rID=242260993&aID=2603669244&domain=litewire.net>
amazonses.com /
Block<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&ent=1&bl-sender-do
main=1&rID=242260993&aID=2603669244&domain=litewire.net>
amazonses.com enterprise-wide
This message was delivered because the content filter score did not
exceed your filter level.
=
________________________________
Total Control Panel
Login<https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net>
To:
ja...@litewire.net<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=242260993&domain=litewire.net>
From:
0000014889078ac6-de7f10a0-b807-4da7-ac96-dce61aebaaa8-000...@amazonses.com<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=2608083723&domain=litewire.net>
Message Score: 2
High (60): Pass
My Spam Blocking Level: High
Medium (75): Pass
Low (90): Pass
Block<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&bl-sender-address=1&rID=242260993&aID=2608083723&domain=litewire.net>
this sender /
Block<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&ent=1&bl-sender-address=1&rID=242260993&aID=2608083723&domain=litewire.net>
this sender enterprise-wide
Block<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&bl-sender-domain=1&rID=242260993&aID=2608083723&domain=litewire.net>
amazonses.com /
Block<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&ent=1&bl-sender-domain=1&rID=242260993&aID=2608083723&domain=litewire.net>
amazonses.com enterprise-wide
This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed
your filter level.
