ts works on the MAIL FROM, so if you
use VERP you can't get the whitelisting benefits, but beside that I'm
not aware of deliverability issues due to the use of VERP.
Stefano
> --
> Benjamin Billon
>
> -Original Message-
> From: mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@
On 17 February 2018 at 02:19, Michael Peddemors wrote:
> [...]
> And since the direction most MTA's go is to reduce any form of 'bounce' or
> backscatter, the idea of using the VERP to detect 'bounces' is probably not
> as important as it once was, unless the emails are forwarded or client side
>
; section: is there anything
specific you want to point out in the specification? They looks
appropriate, to me, even in 2018.
I guess you had a bad experience with a buggy MTA on the receiving
side and so you started to hate pipelining... what is the software?
Which version was around when you
On 10 January 2018 at 08:16, Sotiris Tsimbonis wrote:
> [...] They did
> not report it as spam yesterday, they only viewed it. They don't use an
> email client, they only use the web interface provided by hotmail.
I often heard story like this... the fact is that this "i never marked
it as spam"
In my GPT I see the same identical reports whichever domain I select.
So maybe the "domain filter" is not working and they are showing
aggregates for the whole account.
Stefano
On 28 December 2017 at 14:04, Benjamin BILLON wrote:
> Yes, same here.
>
>
>
> IPs shown are mostly ours (although not
On 26 December 2017 at 22:26, David Carriger
wrote:
> [...]
> I've opened several support tickets with Microsoft - SRX1407027597ID is the
> latest - but they seem completely unable to help. They just tell me that
> there's nothing wrong with the IPs, or that the filtering is due to
> SmartScreen,
On 14 December 2017 at 00:06, Chace Barber via mailop wrote:
> Microsoft recently added the ability to report emails as "junk" in mobile
> devices, something not previously available from them. This is resulting in
> many more users being able to report emails as junk than was the case a few
>
On 13 December 2017 at 13:00, Benjamin BILLON via mailop
wrote:
> Not especially on Nov. 18th, but starting 28th we got more Microsoft FBL than
> Yahoo's, which didn't happen for ... a long time.
We also get more FBL from microsoft than Yahoo but this also because
FBL from Yahoo decreased in the
On 15 November 2017 at 02:03, Mark Milhollan wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Brandon Long wrote:
>
>>Ugh, those timeouts are insane, from a different era.
>
> They might have been shortened by RFC 5321 (only 10 years ago), but
> weren't -- satellite can be terrible and links into disaster areas can
On 14 November 2017 at 23:18, Renaud Allard via mailop
wrote:
> On 14/11/2017 22:59, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
>> Ugh, those timeouts are insane, from a different era.
>
> Taken straight out of RFC5321 tough, but yes, indeed, that RFC is from 2008.
That paragraph is unchanged from rfc2821, s
I started seeing the same error from yahoo the past 7th november.
Almost 3% of delivery attempts fails with that error.
I didn't investigate, yet.
Stefano
On 31 October 2017 at 15:59, Vaibhav wrote:
> Since past few days we are facing delivery issue at Yahoo where most of the
> yahoo active /
On 6 November 2017 at 19:21, Steve Atkins wrote:
>
>> On Nov 6, 2017, at 10:15 AM, John Levine wrote:
>>
>> In article
>> you
>> write:
>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/mailop@mailop.org/
>>>
>>> All other members, you might want to check this out and make sure
>>> you're comfortable with your
alysis
>
> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
>
> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool
> <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ?
>
>
>
> *From:* mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] *On Behalf Of *Brett
> Schenker
> *
in,
I never used automated data URLs, btw:
- data returns a 200 with empty result
- ipStatus returns 204 no content.
- export to CSV works fine.
- web access works fine.
The doc says the "data" url should return the same of the "export to CSV",
so it seems it is not working
On 28 October 2017 at 18:47, Benjamin BILLON via mailop
wrote:
> We couldn't retrieve SNDS data for the past few days (the data feed
> replies 204 No content), and when trying to log in the web-UI it says
> "There's a temporary problem with the service. Please try again. If you
> continue to get
On 24 October 2017 at 17:22, Benjamin BILLON via mailop
wrote:
> Following Microsoft's folks recommendations (on this list and in ... a
> Canadian city a few weeks ago), we're going through tickets as usual, but
> we're for now circling around.
> I just wonder if other senders witnessed the same
I'm also on the "legacy free" GSuite and didn't receive other messages
from this thread at all. Not even in spam.
I've just read them on the web archive.
Stefano
On 25 October 2017 at 23:57, Tom Bartel wrote:
> I didn't get it even in spam (in my gmail account). Can OP resend? I'm
> happy to d
lained) major drop in FBL
at the end of May 2017, but no changes recently.
Stefano
> Alberto
>
> 2017-10-13 14:08 GMT+02:00 Stefano Bagnara :
>>
>> Almost constant FBL levels here in the last days.
>> Do you see a drop in open rates, too? or just the FBL?
>>
>&
ent to recipients
contacted by that IP before the issue appeared are inboxed).
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
On 18 October 2017 at 09:32, Mathieu Marnat wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I have an issue with Outlook's anti spam rules. I have been warming
e) we are receiving FBLs but 3 times fewer than what
> it used to be.
>
> We don't see any glitch from our side and I don't believe in a sudden spike
> of "relevancy" across the board :)
> We are not seeing any increase in bounces/deferrals either.
>
>
> Thanks
.
>
> Also it looks like one of tiscali.it's MXes is just answering with "421
> 4.2.1 Service not available" to us, after the initial delay.
>
> This seems to be independent of the source IP address.
>
> On 06/10/2017 11:41, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
> 1
On 6 October 2017 at 08:59, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> some of our servers are experiencing issues delivering mail to
> tiscali.it/tiscalinet.it italian domains.
more details after few hours of investigations:
1) I tried an "outsider" IP that never sent an email and it did the
sa
, so I try here. I
don't think anyone from tiscali is here, but maybe someone else is
experiencing/experienced something similar. Do you?
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@m
red).
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
On 11 September 2017 at 09:39, Vaibhav wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I have observed that Gmail Postmaster showing all IP in BAD state for 9th
> Sept report. Does anyone observed the same ?
>
> Seems lik
guess it can be safe to drop incoming email from a parked domain.
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
> run by a registrar service. Interestingly not the same used to register
> the domains in question. Does anyone know, if those MX are used fo
Anyways, if you want to start your own blacklist based on sending out
> validation links, feel free.
I didn't ask your permission to start my own list ;-) I simply stated
that I hope someone will start a dnsbl for people dev/nulling
postmaster and YOU said that rfc-clueless is a soluti
re that and I've never had problems
> with it.
>
> Does the postmaster@ address exist (i.e. accepts mail) or does it say
> that postmaster@ doesn't exist?
>
> I think they only track domains that refuse to accept postmaster@,
> abuse@, etc...not domains that accept it and n
ared.
Still I have to find someone that ever received an answer after
writing to their postmaster@ address.
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
>
> -A
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 7:19 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>> Hi Lindani,
>>
>
customers AND to default image block settings in outlook).
I encourage any ESP with data about their IP BCL and inboxing/openrates in
the last months to share them or simply to confirm or deny this pattern for
their IPs. If this list is not the right place you can write directly to me.
--
Stefano
quot;is NOT listed in any RFC2
list."... i guess the website is experiencing some issue right now.
Stefano
On 7 August 2017 at 17:27, Aaron C. de Bruyn wrote:
> It exists: http://rfc-clueless.org/ :)
>
> -A
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 7:19 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>&g
I recently experienced an IP reputation issue with Gmail that seemed
to junk the email "on its own".
One of our transactional IPs (188.165.188.100) usually send less than
1000 daily emails.
A couple of weeks ago one of our free service (mosaico.io) got abused
and an ukrainan sent almost 90.000 ema
of years ago):
staff...@telecomitalia.it
Their only known interactive communication channel is twitter:
@tim_official ... maybe you will have success tweeting them in
"public".
Good luck and let us know how it goes.
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
On 2
to confirm this I'll have to keep the Precedence of the first half
for a couple of months and then invert the Precedence use for a couple of
months, so it will take a lot of time.
Stefano
>
> Best,
>
> Simon
>
> 2017-07-21 16:29 GMT+02:00 Stefano Bagnara :
>
>>
-Unsubscribe and the Feedback-ID headers.
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
On 21 July 2017 at 15:56, Bressier simon wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Based on your experience, is this "Precedence" header mandatory on
> campaigns sent ?
On 17 July 2017 at 21:17, Eric Tykwinski wrote:
> Of more interest to me is how is anyone proactively monitoring for spam?
> We have in place a lot of reactive methods, ie monitoring abuse boxes, FBLs,
> and using Netflow/SiLK to track SMTP volume changes.
> I've never heard of anyone proxying al
On 17 July 2017 at 19:51, Simon Forster wrote:
> [...]
> But I digress. To an extent your point is fair enough. Big hosters are more
> likely to end up on the “worst” lists. However, there’s a qualitative
> element which is not so readily apparent. You can extrapolate it from some
> of the datasou
On 17 July 2017 at 16:57, Simon Forster wrote:
>
> On 17 Jul 2017, at 13:28, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
> Senderscore,
> senderbase, uce-protect, spamhaus, spamcop and other sources are not
> publishing informations that declare OVH worse than others direct
> competito
ng informations that declare OVH worse than others direct
competitor in EU. At least nothing my eyes can read between the
lines..
The point is:
- Are those public "reputation providers" or "public blacklists"
completely wrong? If so, why people keep using them for their
filtering or re
Google messages are simply wrapped at 76 chars, so "unfolding" is
always right with their messages, but I've sees ascii arts in
multiline responses too and if you remove newlines you break the art!
:-)
OK, ignoring ascii arts, you'll still find messages like this one:
550-5.7.0 Message considered
On 7 July 2017 at 12:18, David Hofstee wrote:
> PowerMTA:
> 550 5.2.1 The email account that you tried to reach is disabled. Learn more
> at https://support.google.com/mail/?p=DisabledUser abc.def - gsmtp
>
> Momentum logfile, single line:
> 550-5.1.1 The email account that you tried to reach does
in absence of data to detect what is
spammy and what is not?
Once you get "Bad inboxing" you will not be able to do high open rates any
more: most recipients doesn't even know they have a "spam" folder that
could contain false positives unless you tell them to look there.
expect to see abuse reports or spamtrap hits, while both Chris and I
reported that we see no negative data in SNDS.
What is the reason for Microsoft to expose "random stuff" in SNDS and
instead use other means for their antispam? No one force them to
publish SNDS, so I'd expect the publ
drop in the
rates. I've heard similar reports from other people so I thought
microsoft is testing some new filter.
I didn't try filling the outlook.com form yet because I never received
useful informations (they usually answer that my IP is not
blocked/blacklisted).
Stefano
--
Ste
aus publishes the "top 10" but OVH
is not there (and AFAIK never been there, recently):
https://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/networks/
https://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/botnet-asn/
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
on
public resources I could use to identify how "reputable" an hosting
provider is before I choose it.
I'm not looking for suggestions for a specific provider or blames on
another one, but for tools to do the reputation check on my own so to
find on my own why XYZ is a good or bad choic
June 2017 at 20:06, Steve Atkins wrote:
>
> > On Jun 22, 2017, at 10:52 AM, Jay Hennigan
> wrote:
> >
> > On 6/22/17 3:32 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> >
> >> Maybe I'm a victim of a very broad block targeted to my provider
> >> (OVH),
> &g
'm using this /25
since 7 years with no big issues and I consider it a good "asset").
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Apache James/jDKIM/jSPF
VOXmail/Mosaico.io/VoidLabs
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
rantine or reject for
> gmail.com, or even switch to "no auth no entry", but they can't really do
> that until the false positives are low enough, and they're not there yet.
> ARC may be enough, it may not be. Obviously, measuring the false positive
> rate as it
e unless you remove
the dot from the localpart of the "rfc5322/mime.to" header (so, you'll see
the watning only if To is namesurn...@gmail.com ). But this simply sounds
like a bug, not a feature.
On 15 June 2017 at 08:08, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> On 15 June 2017 at 00:37, Laura Atk
On 15 June 2017 at 00:37, Laura Atkins wrote:
>
> On Jun 14, 2017, at 1:55 PM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
> Not what I saw here: if I send a message with the same rfc5322.from/to (
> ema...@gmail.com) to ema...@gmail.com I don't see warnings.
>
>
> I think this is whe
On 14 June 2017 at 22:28, Laura Atkins wrote:
>
> On Jun 14, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
> BTW please note that the message is "sent from your account." not "by
> ", so a very specific case.
>
>
> Interesting. When I did it (to myse
On 14 June 2017 at 20:33, Mark Milhollan wrote:
> I don't have a strong opinion as to the alert Gmail provides when a
> message has the From header matching the To header, though it seems to
> me most of the time it would result in an SPF failure (whether soft or
> hard) and so be problematic. I
On 14 June 2017 at 20:51, Laura Atkins wrote:
> Gmail doesn’t say it’s spam. Gmail says: This message may not have been
> sent by:
>
Isn't this what DMARC/SPF/DKIM are intended for and at a very larger scale?
BTW please note that the message is "sent from your account." not "by
", so a very sp
t; Apologies if I misunderstand what you are trying to do.
>
> Ken.
>
> --
> Ken O'Driscoll / We Monitor Email
> t: +353 1 254 9400 | w: www.wemonitoremail.com
>
> Need to understand deliverability? Now there's a book:
> www.wemonitoremail.com/book
>
>
&g
folder, while the latter also result in spam
classification (and it is also more understandable)
Stefano
PS: I'm not looking for solutions like "change the From so your DMARC
align", i'm mainly trying to understand the rationale of a similar message
instead of simply enabling
ached the "expired domains" name server the bad results could
last up to 7 days.
At least we know it.
Stefano
>
> - mark
>
>
> Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> > Today I started seeing a lot of rejection like this:
> > ---
> > 554 5.7.1 Service un
against the list return NXDOMAIN
The checkpage doesn't work anymore:
http://www.msrbl.com/check?ip=188.165.188.51
Is MSRBL alive or dead? Do you see similar reports for your messages today
too?
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Void Labs / VOXmail.it
Apache James/jSPF/
Has Been Processed."
>
> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool
> <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ?
>
>
>
> *From:* mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] *On Behalf Of *Stefano
> Bagnara
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 23, 2017 10:43 AM
> *To:* m
;false
positive"?
>
>
> Aloha,
>
> Michael.
>
> --
>
> *Michael J Wise*
> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
>
> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
>
> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool
> <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/detail
ket for the Outlook.com platform, but this is
something specific to the hosted exchange (and maybe specific to a custom
domain, even if they didn't configure anything): is there an only form for
office365/hosted-exchange issues?
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Void Labs / VOXmail.it
Apache James
sure my good reputation.
I don't have any other problem to other providers.. It's just a couple of
message refuses from symanteccloud that I'd like to investigate.
Stefano
>
> Ken.
>
> --
> Ken O'Driscoll / We Monitor Email
> t: +353 1 254 9400 | w: www
appened to another customer with a vodafone.com address
(different IP, similar story).
Thank you,
Stefano
>
> Ken.
>
> --
> Ken O'Driscoll / We Monitor Email
> t: +353 1 254 9400 | w: www.wemonitoremail.com
>
> On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 12:56 +0200, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
support.symantec.com/en_US/article.TECH233678.html
But from the description it's not clear to me if this is only for their
customers or not.
Is there anyone from Symantec here?
Does anyone have experience with this generic message filtered error and
how to deal with it?
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
Void
In my opinion doing antispam in the outgoing is harder.
- First because definition of spam depends on what the *recipient* wants
and you have much less feedback from those recipients when you are on the
sending side.
- Second because you get paid from the one sending (or from advertisers
showing th
On 28 April 2017 at 11:32, Rob McEwen wrote:
> On 4/28/2017 4:47 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
>> Our main domain "mailvox.it" is listed on ivmURI
>>
>
> Stefano,
>
> In the past few days, I'm seeing advertisements from your ESP - that seem
> to be
is in email content) by their
customers? (of course Invaluement is not resposible for that, I'm just
trying to understand).
Thank you,
Stefano
--
Stefano Bagnara
CTO VOXmail.it
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
el W. kindly helped me off-list, thanks!
Turned out I was looking at "the last straw"/"the last drop" while the main
"junk-classification" cause is not the IP but a domain shared between the 2
IPs.
Stefano
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
Hi all,
I have an issue with email *delivered* but to the *spam folder* to
Microsoft (both Hotmail/Outlook.com and Office365/Exchange online
platforms).
I already used the form (Microsoft ticket is SRX1383552039ID) but I keep
receiving human but "standard" responses asking me the SMTP error (even
In past I got answers from this form, I don't know if it is the same you
already used:
https://www.ovh.co.uk/abuse/
I also have servers in OVH and in past I received an enquiry from @
abuse.ovh.net ticketing system asking me details about an RBL listing of
one of my servers. Instead I think they i
Stats from 9 to 10 (CET) from my IPs:
6171: "250 ok dirdel"
53: "451 4.3.2 Internal error reading data" in reply to the MAIL FROM
command.
96: "451 Resources temporarily not available - Please try again later
[#4.16.5]." in reply to "."
5: "421 4.7.0 [GL01] Message from () temporari
I never got answers from postmaster/abuse inboxes from Fastweb.
Either your IP is in CloudMark CSI or your email content is flagged by
CloudMark Authority.
Try sending an email to a @libero.it inbox and if it goes to the spam
folder you know it is CloudMark Authority and you also get the CloudMark
nd
getting back the same bounce and the Google support replies that they are
working on it.
So, also Gmail see the same "access denied" from Alice.it: a trouble shared
is a trouble halved ?
Stefano
On 13 February 2017 at 18:03, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> On 13 February 2017 at 1
On 13 February 2017 at 17:47, Lindani Tshabangu
wrote:
> Thank you guys,
>
> @Stefano, we also received loads of "Service not available - too busy" on
> Friday the 10th.
> These stopped and we started receiving the "Service not available -
> access denied" from then on till today.
>
I receive t
> 250-HELP
> 250-AUTH LOGIN PLAIN
> 250-SIZE 524288000
> 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
> 250-8BITMIME
> 250-STARTTLS
> 250 OK
> quit
> 221 2.0.0 mxcmd08.ad.aruba.it bizsmtp closing connection
Thank you for confirming the Google behaviour!
Stefano
On 27 January 2017 at 21:27, Bran
ry and contact
> their admins to fix it.
>
> Other than that, it's basically up to your policies what to do... well,
> and what your software can do.
>
> For us, the numbers were small enough to not be worth potentially sending
> the mail in the clear.
>
> Brandon
We recently enabled starttls to every destination (announcing the starttls
extension).
We now see a lot of "454 4.3.3 TLS not available due to temporary reason"
in reply to the STARTTLS by a big B2B italian provider named Aruba. We
usually are able to send the email after 2-3-5 attempts, so this i
101 - 176 of 176 matches
Mail list logo
