There are multiple domains involved, they may be forwarding messages, in which case spf won't be enough.
And, there are multiple signals involved, so getting authed would get past those rules, but may hit other ones. Note, that if you are forwarding, you can still run a spam filter and then dkim sign clean mail with your own domain (or something like forwarding.kk-software.de), and that would be sufficient. Or, use spf and forward with an envelope sender in your own domain (again, after spam filtering). Or, in the future, I imagine that doing auth at your border and adding arc headers before forwarding would help. Or we finally implement a way for consumer gmail users to specify that they are getting mail forwarded through a server so we can do a better job. Google Apps admins can specify incoming gateways, and we will treat the mail from them differently because we know it is being forwarded. There's no consumer equivalent. Brandon Forwarding is not a solved problem, is what I'm basically saying. On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Michael Wise <michael.w...@microsoft.com> wrote: > So it is the SPF record missing, plus … some secret sauce. > > Will specifying an SPF record fix the issue? > > > > Aloha, > > Michael. > > -- > > *Michael J Wise* | Microsoft | Spam Analysis | "Your Spam Specimen Has > Been Processed." | Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool > <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ? > > > > *From:* Brandon Long [mailto:bl...@google.com] > *Sent:* Friday, April 1, 2016 4:45 PM > *To:* Michael Wise <michael.w...@microsoft.com> > *Cc:* Pascal Herbert <pascal.herb...@gmail.com>; m...@pixelgate.net; > mailop@mailop.org > > *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Gmail rate limit > > > > Hmm, I thought the new server went out with the updated error messages. > Ah, the change missed the release cut-off, so it'll be fixed next week. > > > > That error message is not correct, it means the mail we're seeing isn't > authenticated and something else about the connection or message is > suspicious. > > > > Brandon > > > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Michael Wise <michael.w...@microsoft.com> > wrote: > > Yeah, there was no AAAA record. > > > > Aloha, > > Michael. > > -- > > *Michael J Wise* | Microsoft | Spam Analysis | "Your Spam Specimen Has > Been Processed." | Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.microsoft.com%2fen-us%2fdownload%2fdetails.aspx%3fid%3d18275&data=01%7c01%7cMichael.Wise%40microsoft.com%7cd11ec385e0f3409ffb9b08d35a87a4ce%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=uShQwWNPGagLQg4ZO5AQ5oYoSM4O%2b7acDB7VHNGm7nM%3d> > ? > > > > *From:* mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] *On Behalf Of *Pascal > Herbert > *Sent:* Friday, April 1, 2016 2:45 PM > *To:* m...@pixelgate.net; mailop@mailop.org > *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Gmail rate limit > > > > Forgot to mention that. The server only uses ipv4. No ipv6. > > Pascal > > On Apr 1, 2016 23:42, "Mark Milhollan" <m...@pixelgate.net> wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016, Pascal Herbert wrote: > > >Google is currently rejecting mails from some of our servers with: > >The IP address sending this message does not have a PTR record. > > Any chance your mail server used IPv6? Lots of people forget setting up > PTRs when they first enable v6. > > > /mark > > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fchilli.nosignal.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fmailop&data=01%7c01%7cMichael.Wise%40microsoft.com%7cd11ec385e0f3409ffb9b08d35a87a4ce%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=V7n6lbRc0s0ZDzLmRhZtvMFqq5D870sHX3RNomYB0iE%3d> > > >
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
