On Thu, 2020-10-01 at 11:31 +0200, Alessandro Vesely via Dng wrote:
> On Tue 29/Sep/2020 11:10:12 +0200 Simon Hobson wrote:
> > Alessandro Vesely via Dng wrote:
> >
> >>> I have no choice over the neighbours !
> >
> >> Don't buy overly cheap connections...
> >
> > Doesn't matter how much you pa
On Tue 29/Sep/2020 11:10:12 +0200 Simon Hobson wrote:
Alessandro Vesely via Dng wrote:
I have no choice over the neighbours !
Don't buy overly cheap connections...
Doesn't matter how much you pay - unless you get an entire net-block to
yourself then you have no control over the neighbour
Alessandro Vesely via Dng wrote:
>> I have no choice over the neighbours !
> Don't buy overly cheap connections...
Doesn't matter how much you pay - unless you get an entire net-block to
yourself then you have no control over the neighbours. Only the ISP has control
over the neighbours.
> An
On Sun 27/Sep/2020 20:11:39 +0200 Simon Hobson wrote:
Alessandro Vesely via Dng wrote:
[...]
And it is key to get an IP address without poorly reputed neighbors —check
talosintelligence.com.
I have no choice over the neighbours !
Don't buy overly cheap connections...
I also use lack of
Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>> You mean, like in the web hosting days before hostname headers where
>> you needed a different IP address for each hosted domain name ? That's
>> very 20th century and not a luxury most of us have.
>
> FWIW, Linode (where my sole server is hosted) gives me a /64 IPv6 bloc
On 2020-09-27 19:11, Simon Hobson wrote:
> You mean, like in the web hosting days before hostname headers where
> you needed a different IP address for each hosted domain name ? That's
> very 20th century and not a luxury most of us have.
FWIW, Linode (where my sole server is hosted) gives me a /
Alessandro Vesely via Dng wrote:
>> IIRC the specific complaint wasn't that they checked for rDNS, but that they
>> matched it against the domain of the sender. That makes no sense at all, it
>> prevents running more than one domain on one mail server.
> Why would it? A configurable mail serv
On Sat 26/Sep/2020 23:19:33 +0200 Simon Hobson wrote:
Marjorie Roome via Dng wrote:
I also end up rejecting a lot of spam because it lacks a reverse hostname (it's
easily the largest category).
So it's not just a few such as ntlworld and gmx that check this.
IIRC the specific complaint wasn
Marjorie Roome via Dng wrote:
> I also end up rejecting a lot of spam because it lacks a reverse hostname
> (it's easily the largest category).
> So it's not just a few such as ntlworld and gmx that check this.
IIRC the specific complaint wasn't that they checked for rDNS, but that they
matche
On 25/09/2020 18:21, DECbot wrote:
>
> I had to double check my config. I never got around to forward
> outgoing mail through my ssh tunnel. I'm still using the postfix
> relayhost parameter to granting me my ISP's blessing to smtp out to
> the rest of the world--and likely giving them a copy of al
On 2020-09-24 12:07, Rick Moen wrote:
> I've had no problems _without_ DMARC/DKIM (but with a strongly
> asserted SPF record). Have been operating home *ix SMTP smarthosts on
> static IP with matching rDNS, and maintaining a clean, high-reputation
> system since the 1980s.
>
> I've tried to alwa
On September 24, 2020 5:52:20 AM Mark Rousell
wrote:
On 23/09/2020 02:32, DECbot wrote:
Since my ISP is the devil and blocks port 25, I'm using autossh to forward
port 25 traffic to a $5/month vps.
Do you have difficulty with your outgoing SMTP being blocked (often
silently swallowed, from
On 24/09/2020 20:07, Rick Moen wrote:
>
> DMARC can be made to be a non-issue. ;->
>
> :r! dig -t txt _dmarc.linuxmafia.com +short
> "DMARC: tragically misdesigned since 2012. Check our SPF RR, instead."
> Basically, in my experience, some operators may be assigning a _very small_
> spamicity
Quoting Mark Rousell (mark.rous...@signal100.com):
> Option 1 is a bit embarrassing if anyone notices (e.g.
> "host-46462.static.bugtown.myisp.net" isn't too cool as the name of your
> mail server) but I don't see any technical downside, although DMARC
> might perhaps be an issue nowadays.
DMARC
On Thu, 2020-09-24 at 17:32 +0100, Mark Rousell wrote:
> On 24/09/2020 13:43, Jim Jackson wrote:
>
>
>
> > Mostly. Somemail servers do a reverse IP lookup and see if it
> > matches your envelope From domain.
> >
>
> Yes, this is an annoyance. There are two ways round
On 24/09/2020 13:43, Jim Jackson wrote:
> Mostly. Somemail servers do a reverse IP lookup and see if it matches your
> envelope From domain.
Yes, this is an annoyance. There are two ways round this: (1) Change
your server's SMTP From domain to be the same as your static IP's PTR
hostname, and (2
On 24-09-2020 14:43, Jim Jackson wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2020, Mark Rousell wrote:
>
>> On 24/09/2020 07:30, Dimitris via Dng wrote:
>>> in my opinion a home connection server smtp+imap/pop will not be very
>>> usable. most rbl's block dynamic addresses so you won't be able to
>>> deliver much...
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020, Mark Rousell wrote:
> On 24/09/2020 07:30, Dimitris via Dng wrote:
> >
> > in my opinion a home connection server smtp+imap/pop will not be very
> > usable. most rbl's block dynamic addresses so you won't be able to
> > deliver much...
>
> In some areas (e.g. the UK), the b
On 24/09/2020 11:14, Mark Rousell wrote:
On 24/09/2020 07:30, Dimitris via Dng wrote:
in my opinion a home connection server smtp+imap/pop will not be very
usable. most rbl's block dynamic addresses so you won't be able to
deliver much...
In some areas (e.g. the UK), the better ISPs provi
On 24/09/2020 07:30, Dimitris via Dng wrote:
>
> in my opinion a home connection server smtp+imap/pop will not be very
> usable. most rbl's block dynamic addresses so you won't be able to
> deliver much...
In some areas (e.g. the UK), the better ISPs provide static IPs so this
issue is bypassed.
On 23/09/2020 02:32, DECbot wrote:
> Since my ISP is the devil and blocks port 25, I'm using autossh to
> forward port 25 traffic to a $5/month vps.
Do you have difficulty with your outgoing SMTP being blocked (often
silently swallowed, from what I've seen) to certain large mail services
using thi
On 9/23/20 11:05 PM, Marjorie Roome via Dng wrote:
> 1) a more restrictive postfix main.cf than in the guide, so less spam
> gets through to rspamd: postfix rejected about 37% of emails last
> month, rspamd about 7% with another 5% going to to users spam folders
> and is thus reviewable by them. Th
On 9/20/20 12:55 AM, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> Easiest possible newbie email server setup, use and support, ideas?
in my opinion a home connection server smtp+imap/pop will not be very
usable. most rbl's block dynamic addresses so you won't be able to
deliver much...
i'd suggest a host/vps online w
Hi Arnt,
On Sat, 2020-09-19 at 23:55 +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> ..devuan to the rescue? Norwegian ISP "Get" is ditching their email
> service and pointing their clients to a paid service, which again is
> pointing them to Gmail's ad laden services, drawing due scorn. [1]
>
>
> ..since we can
Hi,
I run a mail server for myself on a small pc (32-bit, 7 watt Via C7 Eden
cpu) running Devuan. It was originally built on Debian Wheezy back in 2012
following the wheezy guide found at https://workaround.org/ispmail/wheezy/.
After the updates for wheezy trailed off, I followed the instructi
Hi,
..devuan to the rescue? Norwegian ISP "Get" is ditching their email
service and pointing their clients to a paid service, which again is
pointing them to Gmail's ad laden services, drawing due scorn. [1]
..since we can do better, I'm thinking "Devuan Email Server Flavor"
sort of distro to
26 matches
Mail list logo
