On 2022-04-22 at 17:30 -0500, Faisal Misle via mailop wrote:
> Note the trailing dot on the second policy. Is that a valid MX for the
> policies of the file? I could not find anything about it on RFC 8461 and
> most validators were flagging it as an invalid MX.
>
> Looking forward to hearing
It appears that � ngel via mailop said:
>In the usual context of email communication, if I receive an email
> From: Henrik S
>
>what I would want to know if whether it really comes from
>tomatoservers.com. As such, a signature by pobox.com would have no
>value for that.
Keep in mind that
Does anyone have the bounce message they're sending back handy?
On 4/19/22 6:36 PM, Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote:
To add +1 experience to this, I've been seeing it intermittently. Some
of my customers who lack SPF absolutely cannot deliver mail to Gmail,
100% rejection due to lack of
Hello all,
Got a quick question regarding the syntax of an MTA-STS policy file.
Example:
version: STSv1
mode: testing
mx: mx.example.com
max_age: 86400
vs.
version: STSv1
mode: testing
mx: mx.example.com.
max_age: 86400
Note the trailing dot on the second policy. Is that a valid MX for the
On 2022-04-21 at 10:04 +0800, Henrik S via mailop wrote:
> Hello
>
> My mail is sent by the third party smtp server, and the dkim
> signature
> is made for the third party domain (for this case, it's pobox.com).
>
> does this DKIM have helps to the authorization of my outgoing
> messages?
>
>
Hi Jarland,
that was very interesting, thank you for sharing these details.
I'm curious to know how you caught this in the first place. It would be
interesting to know some technics on how to catch bad behaviors before they
get out of hand and many of us here might be interested in the how-tos
Awesome, thank you very much for that! I wasn't aware of your massive
upgrade but can understand the delay on answering requests, no worries here!
I got your email off-list, I'll reply there asap.
Thanks!
Le ven. 22 avr. 2022 à 14:13, Rob McEwen via mailop a
écrit :
> I will answer this off
On 4/22/22 11:00 AM, Anne Mitchell via mailop wrote:
Woodpecker, at least, is somewhat up front about the fact that what they are
doing is enabling their senders to violate Google's policies:
A lot of these outfits aren't even trying to hide it any more, which is
unfortunate because it risks
> On Apr 22, 2022, at 11:05 AM, Luis E. Muñoz via mailop
> wrote:
>
> On 21 Apr 2022, at 11:45, Anne Mitchell via mailop wrote:
>
>> Until Google manages to shut down outfits like MailShake and Woodpecker and
>> Gmass, instead of turning a blind eye to it, Google will never get a handle
>>
On 21 Apr 2022, at 11:45, Anne Mitchell via mailop wrote:
Until Google manages to shut down outfits like MailShake and
Woodpecker and Gmass, instead of turning a blind eye to it, Google
will never get a handle on the abuse that goes through the Gmail API,
in fact it feels as if they are
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 8:17 AM Scott Mutter via mailop
wrote:
Been preaching about this for years. Have yet to get anybody of value's
> attention.
>
I might not be of value, but I did respond to this the last time you
brought this up and shared our reasoning and perspective.
- Marcel
Been preaching about this for years. Have yet to get anybody of value's
attention.
If you're going to block mail servers by IP address (which, to be clear, I
don't have a problem with providers doing this - and Yahoo does this along
with countless other mail services), then you need to have a
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 3:10 AM Benoît Panizzon via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
>
> I added our ISP email service email domains. But we also host
> business customer domains on that email platform, which I can not all
> add.
>
It might be a good idea to sign those emails leaving your
Hi
Trying via this list as I had no success, with BT Customer Service or
via BT Switzerland.
Hopefully a BT mail admin is reading this, or somebody is able to
forward to the right person.
For certain technical telephony issues regarding international
interconnection, BT Customer Service
I will answer this off list today. At invaluement, for the past 2 weeks, we've
been in the middle of the largest hardware upgrade we've done in over 5 years,
so we're backed up on requests like this one. We haven't even processed new
trial requests during this crazy time. I have about 5 others
Hi Benoit,
That's pretty much on top of my wishlist for Christmas as well, but so far
there's no other option for adding domains to the Yahoo FBL.
Regards,
Florian Vierke | Senior Manager, Deliverability Services
t: +49 89 12009713
e: florian.vie...@mapp.com
-Original Message-
From:
Hi Brandon,
Nice to meet you and thank you for answering my email.
I managed to get the eml from that user if you are interested in checking
the headers and seeing if you notice any odd behavior.
What I remain curious to know is why the Date in the Received header had
its timezone changed, but
Hi everyone, sorry to bother you with such requests but I'm having a hard
time reaching out to Invaluement (https://www.invaluement.com/)
Our IPs got listed there and I'm trying to open a line of communication to
better understand what happened, in order to fix it before requesting for
delisting.
Hi List
I subscribed to the Yahoo FBL on after we got some 'low volume' phished
account abused for spam and staying under our radar, targetting yahoo
recipients which now tempfails our smtp outbound ip range for 'user
complaints'.
Dear Brandon,
Brandon Long via mailop writes:
> Generally speaking,
> adding a dkim signature to your message adds a "source" anchor,
> something that ties a message to other messages.
INDEED, i love this statement so much!
Thanks ^^^
Sincerely, Linux fan Byung-Hee
--
^고맙습니다 _布德天下_
A major reason many ESPs double DKIM sign is because two major providers
(Google and Yahoo) will only provide compliance data (FBL in the case of Yahoo
and access to Google Postmaster Tools in the case of Google) based on DKIM.
While it is possible to have customers (or register for customers),
21 matches
Mail list logo
