In article <69632fdf-2440-4480-8afe-5cbf36aa0...@billmail.scconsult.com> you write: >HOWEVER: if I understand Simon's description of the rejection events >correctly, the trigger was specifically a message with a broken DKIM >signature which had not had its From munged (because the DMARC record >had p=none,) and that changing Mailman to munge ALL From headers fixed >the problem. This would imply that Google is doing something very >dubious in looking for "authentication."
It's my impression that it didn't fix the problem, since the next thing we heard was that Google bounced the daily digest. It's hard to imagine how DKIM signatures inside a digest could make any difference. I don't think the funky DKIM signature was the problem in the first place. When Google rejects messages sent over IPv6 that have no DKIM signatures (at least no valid ones) and no SPF, they'e doing just what they say they'll do. I don't see why anyone is surprised. Still waiting to hear when mailop.org adds its SPF record. R's, John _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
