Yes.
Although ... if there is a standard header field that doesn't start with an X-, would love to know what it would be. I personally prefer the Comments: header, as documented in RFC-822 and subsequent, but nobody else seems to use it. As to the system design ... That's not something I am in a position to speak to publicly. Aloha, Michael. -- Michael J Wise Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed." Open a ticket for Hotmail<http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=614866> ? -----Original Message----- From: Dave Crocker <d...@dcrocker.net> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2024 10:31 AM To: Michael Wise <michael.w...@microsoft.com>; mailop@mailop.org Subject: Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] onmicrosoft.com customers forging @microsoft.com addresses for phishing [You don't often get email from d...@dcrocker.net<mailto:d...@dcrocker.net>. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] On 9/20/2024 10:17 AM, Michael Wise via mailop wrote: > we do send it out a different pool, and we do try to flag it as spam. Michael, By different pool, I suspect you mean different IP Address (block), but not different signed DKIM domain name. And by 'flagging' I gather you mean with a non-standard header field, given the X- example you included. If you are knowingly sending out suspect content, I suggest you fully separate it from you message flow that you do not suspect. Make the assessment job at receivers easier. If I'm misunderstanding, please explain. tnx. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net mast:@dcrocker@mastodon.social
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
