Something like this https://support.google.com/faqs/answer/6151275 ?
Or help with the ediscovery product? It's a gsuite product so help would
be through the regular gsuite channels.
Or can you be more specific?
Brandon
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 5:09 PM Chris Boyd via mailop
wrote:
> Anyone know
Anyone know how to get hold of Gmail and Hotmail e-discovery contacts? Google
searches for Gmail get me links to their Vault service, and
https://ediscovery.google.com/discovery/u/0/ throws a 400 error. Hotmail
searches get me a bunch of irrelevant products.
Thanks in advance.
—Chris
On 17 Apr 2020, at 15:20, Al Iverson via mailop wrote:
If you're going to copy what he does just block 0/0, it's faster. :\
And cheaper! :-)
Not my intention at all. But the collection of network ranges would be
useful to me in trying to understand how a large collection of
distributed
If it makes you feel any better, I still get emailed delisting
requests for both your Korea blacklist and APEWS (!).
Al
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 5:26 PM John Levine via mailop
wrote:
>
> In article <2aeca2a6-dbf3-419b-bb62-929aa6877...@billmail.scconsult.com> you
> write:
> >For 15+ years I've
In article <2aeca2a6-dbf3-419b-bb62-929aa6877...@billmail.scconsult.com> you
write:
>For 15+ years I've tried every form of complaint and DNS trickery I can
>think up to make bogus DNSBL queries stop. The only success I've ever
>had has been with a couple of dumb cargo-culting "check all the
If you're going to copy what he does just block 0/0, it's faster. :\
Al
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 3:34 PM Luis E. Muñoz via mailop
wrote:
>
>
> Wow,
>
> tried twice to email you directly w no luck
>
> - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
>
> (reason: 550 5.7.1
On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:18:22 -0700, Mark Fletcher via mailop
wrote:
>Is anyone on here with Secureserver/GoDaddy or Wanadoo/Orange? We are
>regularly bumping up against their message/connection limits, and I was
>hoping we could get those raised.
Our normal advice is to put simultaneous
On 2020-04-17 16:02, Bill Cole via mailop wrote:
On 17 Apr 2020, at 15:06, John Levine via mailop wrote:
Well, it appears that spamlookup.net expired today and got picked up by
a squatter.
That was my initial thought too, but the IP for bsb.spamlookup.net is
unreachable by browser.
Wow,
tried twice to email you directly w no luck
- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
(reason: 550 5.7.1 : Client
host rejected: Get a real domain, spammy)
Oh well, thank you anyway.
-lem
On 17 Apr 2020, at 12:31, Bill Cole via mailop wrote:
On 17 Apr
Thanks guys. I had sent an email to the postmaster at TPG, but it seems
no one lives there - not even an auto-response.
On 17/4/20 2:32 pm, Vytis Marciulionis via mailop wrote:
> lol
> Well, if that makes you feel better, I also saw the same temporary
> rejections appearing for tpg.com.au
On 17 Apr 2020, at 15:06, John Levine via mailop wrote:
In article
you write:
How much weight does BSB carry in RHSBL ranking ? A false positive
once in a while can happen, but will many
receivers be consulting this and scoring it high ?
I've never heard of it and would be pretty
On 17 Apr 2020, at 10:42, Steven Champeon via mailop wrote:
I sent this to John offlist but here is a list of the IPs that are
doing
stupid and useless queries against one of our mirrors (couple of days
stale
but still potentially useful to someone):
count IP
122 172.253.12.1
You are welcome.
As Kent said. I think its safe just ignore them for now on.
Maybe in some days this services will remove then from the lookup loop if
it's not fixed.
Regards
Em sex, 17 de abr de 2020 15:45, J Doe escreveu:
>
> On Apr 17, 2020, at 2:35 PM, Thiago Rodrigo F. Rodrigues <
>
In article you write:
>How much weight does BSB carry in RHSBL ranking ? A false positive once in a
>while can happen, but will many
>receivers be consulting this and scoring it high ?
I've never heard of it and would be pretty surprised if it made any
practical difference. My DNS server
> On Apr 17, 2020, at 2:35 PM, Thiago Rodrigo F. Rodrigues
> wrote:
>
> Sounds like a bug.
>
> Every domain is appearing as listed by the services that i normally use
> (mxtoolbox and multirbl.valli.org)
>
> http://multirbl.valli.org/lookup/google.com.html
>
Sounds like a bug.
Every domain is appearing as listed by the services that i normally use
(mxtoolbox and multirbl.valli.org)
http://multirbl.valli.org/lookup/google.com.html
http://multirbl.valli.org/lookup/microsoft.com.html
http://multirbl.valli.org/lookup/yahoo.com.html
Maybe its returning
Hello,
One of the domains I manage for a small non-profit has been listed at:
bsb.spamlookup.net (BSB RHSBL).
In consulting my server logs I am positive this is a false-positive, however
attempting to connect via HTTP/S to: bsb.spamlookup.net or: spamlookup.net
fails (including via the URL:
Hi all,
Is anyone on here with Secureserver/GoDaddy or Wanadoo/Orange? We are
regularly bumping up against their message/connection limits, and I was
hoping we could get those raised.
Also, this is my first post here, so hi. I run Groups.io. If you ever have
any issues with us, please feel free
About to go into another weekend, so a good time to post an update on
what our spam auditing team is seeing in the wild this week.
* SendGrid compromised accounts sending phishing
Seeing a lot more cases of this occurring again, mostly phishing attacks.
* Amazon forged domain spam.. seeing
In article ,
Andrew Barrett via mailop wrote:
>Do Gmail/Google consume data from any other RBL, even where G/G might
>periodically create a local copy to query? At least one claims G/G does,
>but I remain skeptical.
I am reasonably sure they do but I am quite sure they do it by a private bulk
Understand your frustration, especially when the big guys don't SWIP (or
rwhois) very clearly...
NetRange: 172.253.0.0 - 172.253.255.255
CIDR: 172.253.0.0/16
NetName:GOOGLE
NetHandle: NET-172-253-0-0-1
Parent: NET172 (NET-172-0-0-0-0)
NetType:Direct
I sent this to John offlist but here is a list of the IPs that are doing
stupid and useless queries against one of our mirrors (couple of days stale
but still potentially useful to someone):
count IP
122 172.253.12.1
119 172.253.14.3
117 172.253.12.2
lol
Well, if that makes you feel better, I also saw the same temporary
rejections appearing for tpg.com.au in the last week or so.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:09 PM Noel Butler via mailop
wrote:
> Wouldn't worry too much about it, they've had problems with their mail
> system for months.
>
> And
Wouldn't worry too much about it, they've had problems with their mail
system for months.
And good luck getting anyone to talk to who can understand your problem,
you're palmed out to their non Australian call centre monkeys who are
less then useless in philipines, with COVID-19 its even worse
Hi,
Is there anyone from TPG here?
Since Monday we've been seeing messages sent to tpg.com.au addresses
intermittently get rejected with "451 4.3.2 Please try again later".
Grateful if you could contact me.
Thanks,
Mark
___
mailop mailing list
25 matches
Mail list logo
