On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 01:45:52PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote: > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 08:22:23PM +0300, Reco wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:58:05PM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 07:14:01PM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 11:24:42AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 05:57:40PM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:48:44AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 07:31:57AM -0400, Henning Follmann wrote: > > > > > > > > So it boils down to "MTA needs care on a regular basis" and "some > > > > blacklist can add your MTA for no good reason". First one is universal > > > > (applies to any Internet-facing service), second one can be beat with a > > > > creative use of hosting. Also, https://mxtoolbox.com. A non-free > > > > service, but a useful one. > > > > > > > > > > Can we be more vague? This is how conspiracy theories spawn. > > > > What's so vague about "you've got into some blacklist, and they require > > some monetary compensation to whitelist you"? These things happen. > > Said blacklist does not affect your ability to receive mail, but can > > affect sending it. > > I was referring to "add your MTA for no good reason". > That is vague and really not true.
I'll leave you to your option. Not that I agree with it. > > > > > In the old days losing an email was considered unacceptible; > > > > > > > > It still is, you just have to consider a corporate communications as > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > these days, there is so much junk that false positives are expected > > > > > and routine. > > > > > > > > That haven't changed much in the last 15 years. > > > > > > How is that to be expected? This all sounds like hear-say but > > > did this actually happened? > > > > Either you filter spam, and accept a certain amount of collateral damage > > (i.e. some legitimate mail goes into spam), or you accept anything and > > your users are drown in spam and viri (viruses? whatever). Or you try to > > find a reasonable in-between and accept that occasional spam letter once > > in a while. Surely you agree that it's been this way for a long time. > > > > Sure, I understand this. > However as a person I depend on e-mail and I really never had any of > these issues. Consider yourself lucky. IMO all it takes is a single online purchase by a single user of yours. > I look at how these heuristic based filter work and it is easy to > maintain a form of communication where the likelihood of blocked > is low. > Pretty much don't do anything marketers do. Agreed. > Do not use binary content. Disagreed. Sending a binary attachment here and there is useful, so is receiving it. A size of said attachment should not exceed a reasonable limit of course. > Do not use HTML Tell it to Thunderbird users. Or that toy Android MUA (K-9 or whatever it called). Or, that poor soul who uses outlook.com instead of e-mail. > No links either In this maillist they tend to do it. Occasionally. > Avoid explicit words. That's the can of worms that I refuse to open. The reason being the constantly shifting definition of "explicit", and its dependency on a current political situation. > I could go on. No need to. I have a single question - do you use SpamAssassin or Rspamd? > > > > I somehow doubt that Debian project membership requires to be an expert > > > > in any MTA, or to have any system administration skills for that matter. > > > > In another words, of course it's not normal, but is something that's to > > > > be expected. > > > > > > Well, yes, > > > I block random domains. But doing so is not random. > > > I first try to contact the e-mail owner and the admin. But if they do > > > no stop sending spam they are banned (usually forever). > > > I also block constantcontact and mailchimp, because they are basically > > > commercial spamming services and anyone can add anyone on any mailing > > > list. ... > > Sorry I wasn't clear in my text. > I absolutely understand We are talking about getting your e-mail out and > accepted. I was basically describing the thought process of the > receiving side, why you could be ending up being blocked. And > how it is mainly your responsibility if you end up in trouble (not > only as an e-mail admin, applies to life in general). > > > > So, a Debian contributor Alice sends a private e-mail to a Debian > > contributor Bob. Both Alice and Bob use arbitrary e-mail servers, most > > likely beyond their control. E-mail bounces, Alice does not get any > > meaningful diagnostics, Bob does not get a e-mail. It can happen. > > > > It can happen, you could win the lottery :) > Could, Would, if and but. All vague forms of arguing. I do not know the specifics of the cases Michael mentioned. Hence the vague guessing. Reco
