Thanks, it was my bad. I did put an spf record, a couple of hours
ago, but mail-tester said it had not propagated.
I am going to paste my test results, because I have still some
questions.
Comments in line
Good stuff. Your email is almost perfect
Score :
7.7/10
Subject : test #4Received 0 minutes ago
Click here to view your message
From : John Covici <cov...@ccs.covici.com>
Bounce address : cov...@ccs.covici.com
Reply-To : cov...@ccs.covici.com
Text version
hello.
--
Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is:
How do
you spend it?
John Covici wb2una
cov...@ccs.covici.com
Source
Received: by mail-tester.com (Postfix, from userid 500)
id 567CCA0BC0; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:59:14 +0100 (CET)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on mail-tester.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No/0.3/5.0
X-Spam-Test-Scores: KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.32,SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,SPF_NONE=0.001,
URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001
X-Spam-Last-External-IP: 166.84.7.93
X-Spam-Last-External-HELO: covici.com
X-Spam-Last-External-rDNS: debian-2.covici.com
X-Spam-Date-of-Scan: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:59:14 +0100
X-Spam-Report:
* 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was
* blocked. See
* http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
* for more information.
* [URIs: covici.com]
* 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
* 0.0 SPF_NONE SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record
* 0.3 KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS Relay HELO differs from its IP's reverse DNS
***** I don't understand this one, I have rdns pointers on
ccs.covici.com and debian-2.covici.com .
Received-SPF: None (no SPF record) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=166.84.7.93;
helo=covici.com; envelope-from=cov...@ccs.covici.com;
receiver=test-dvqgdn...@srv1.mail-tester.com
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.1 mail-tester.com D5C5CA0BBF
Authentication-Results: mail-tester.com; dmarc=none header.from=ccs.covici.com
Received: from covici.com (debian-2.covici.com [166.84.7.93])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by mail-tester.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5C5CA0BBF
for <test-dvqgdn...@srv1.mail-tester.com>; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:59:11
+0100 (CET)
Received: from ccs.covici.com (ccs.covici.com [70.109.51.194])
(authenticated bits=0)
by covici.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-22) with ESMTPSA id 30I92xk83168896
(version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT)
for <test-dvqgdn...@srv1.mail-tester.com>; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 04:03:00
-0500
Received: from ccs.covici.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ccs.covici.com (8.17.1.9/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 30I8xDLB1500757
(version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT)
for <test-dvqgdn...@srv1.mail-tester.com>; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 03:59:13
-0500
Received: (from covici@localhost)
by ccs.covici.com (8.17.1.9/8.17.1/Submit) id 30I8xCA01500756;
Wed, 18 Jan 2023 03:59:12 -0500
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 03:59:12 -0500
Message-ID: <m34jsoi5gf.wl-cov...@ccs.covici.com>
From: John Covici <cov...@ccs.covici.com>
To: test-dvqgdn...@srv1.mail-tester.com
Subject: test #4
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue)
FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0
Emacs/28.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Reply-To: cov...@ccs.covici.com
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
hello.
--
Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is:
How do
you spend it?
John Covici wb2una
cov...@ccs.covici.com
-0.3
SpamAssassin thinks you can improve
The famous spam filter SpamAssassin. Score: -0.3.
A score below -5 is considered spam.
-0.32 KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS Relay HELO differs from its IP's reverse DNS
-0.001 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.001 SPF_NONE SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record
-2
You're not fully authenticated
We check if the server you are sending from is authenticated
-1
We found an SPF entry on your server but it has still not been propagated
-1
Your message is not signed with DKIM
You do not have a DMARC record
Your reverse DNS does not match with your sending domain.
Your domain name ccs.covici.com is assigned to a mail server.
Your hostname covici.com is assigned to a server.
Your message could be improved
Checks whether your message is well formatted or not.
There is no html version of your message.
You have no images in your message
Your content is safe
We checked if you used an URL shortener system.
Your message does not contain a List-Unsubscribe header
You're not blacklisted
Your lovely total: 7.7/10
OK, even without dkim and marc, why is gmail rejecting?
On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 00:45:11 -0500,
Bill Cole via mailop wrote:
>
> On 2023-01-18 at 00:16:53 UTC-0500 (Wed, 18 Jan 2023 00:16:53 -0500)
> John Covici via mailop <cov...@ccs.covici.com>
> is rumored to have said:
>
> > hmmm, I have one for covici.com -- does this not cover the subdomain?
>
> No.
>
> > I don't even think my registrar can have an spf for a subdomain.
>
> That would be remarkably weak on their part. SPF is just a DNS
> TXT record that starts with 'v=spf1' and you can have one for any
> name in DNS. You have MX records for ccs.covici.com, so surely
> you can add a TXT record for is.
>
> >
> > On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 21:08:18 -0500,
> > Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote:
> >>
> >> One very obvious one I hit right away. You seem to be sending
> >> from @ccs.covici.com, and it has no SPF record:
> >> https://www.whatsmydns.net/#TXT/ccs.covici.com
> >>
> >> A good, solid SPF record is a bare minimum these days. Google is
> >> requiring it more than ever, and while the message they're giving
> >> you isn't the one I'm used to seeing for that, every negative
> >> point about the email you send is a mark against you which means
> >> every aspect you can improve on is relevant.
> >>
> >> On 2023-01-17 18:03, John Covici via mailop wrote:
> >>> OK, well, now I can't send even to a single gmail address. What is
> >>> mail-tester.com --I have never used it? Is it a website?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 18:20:09 -0500,
> >>> Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2023-01-17 17:06, John Covici via mailop wrote:
> >>>>> Still broke for me.
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe your issue was different from the one in this thread
> >>>> and best summarized by your message in that separate thread:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2023-01-17 10:31, John Covici via mailop wrote:
> >>>>> Hi. For some reason this morning, I am having problems
> >>>>> sending to
> >>>>> gmail addresses. I get the following error for each:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <<< 550-5.7.1 [166.84.7.93 12] Our system has detected
> >>>>> that this
> >>>>> message is
> >>>>> <<< 550-5.7.1 likely unsolicited mail. To reduce the amount
> >>>>> of spam
> >>>>> sent to Gmail,
> >>>>> <<< 550-5.7.1 this message has been blocked. Please visit
> >>>>> <<< 550-5.7.1
> >>>>> https://support.google.com/mail/?p=UnsolicitedMessageError
> >>>>> Now I have had no problems sending to gmail, but this message was
> >>>>> send to maybe 40 users or so -- is this my problem, or am I doing
> >>>>> something else wrong?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's arguable which is worse, but this is definitely different
> >>>> than spam folder delivery. I would argue your situation is better
> >>>> because I'd rather know it wasn't delivered than tell someone to
> >>>> check their spam folder, because people just don't and you have
> >>>> little clear insight into the fact that they absolutely need to
> >>>> look there. That said, I just performed a log audit and I do not
> >>>> see a recent increase in these error messages from our side. I'm
> >>>> not Google, obviously, but we process enough email that I feel
> >>>> like polling my logs can easily indicate a trend of lack thereof.
> >>>>
> >>>> My first instinct in your position would be to use something like
> >>>> mail-tester.com to get a basic check over your headers, DNS,
> >>>> etc. I know it's not wildly popular on this list but in a world
> >>>> where the average user still runs to mxtoolbox, mail-tester.com
> >>>> is exponentially better in it's assessments.
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> mailop mailing list
> >>>> mailop@mailop.org
> >>>> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
> >>>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mailop mailing list
> >> mailop@mailop.org
> >> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is:
> > How do
> > you spend it?
> >
> > John Covici wb2una
> > cov...@ccs.covici.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > mailop mailing list
> > mailop@mailop.org
> > https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>
>
> --
> Bill Cole
> b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
> (AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
> Not Currently Available For Hire
> _______________________________________________
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>
--
Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is:
How do
you spend it?
John Covici wb2una
cov...@ccs.covici.com
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
