On Apr 7, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Alexander Schaefer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in the last months I was able to get spamming servers rechecked after
> they were secured at:
> https://support.msn.com/eform.aspx?productKey=edfsmsbl2&ct=eformts
>
> The URL has been changed, as far as I see, and I was not abl
Brett, please contact me offlist, with details. I'm out of the office (sick)
today, so I may not respond instantaneously, but I am checking in.
Anne
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
CEO/President
ISIPP SuretyMail Email Reputation, Accreditation & Certification
Your mail system + SuretyMail accreditation
Hello,
in the last months I was able to get spamming servers rechecked after
they were secured at:
https://support.msn.com/eform.aspx?productKey=edfsmsbl2&ct=eformts
The URL has been changed, as far as I see, and I was not able to find
the new location or possibility.
Can anybody help me out?
T
> From: chris
> We are simply trying to
> design our systems so that when something happens like a customers account
> getting compromised that once we can stop the cause that we can get the
> customers mail flowing again and they arent stuck waiting hours and days
> for each RBL to remove the li
I was wondering if there was a contact at Verizon on here that I can talk
to off list. Thanks so much.
Brett
--
Brett Schenker
Man of Many Things, Including
5B Consulting - http://www.5bconsulting.com
Graphic Policy - http://www.graphicpolicy.com
Twitter - http://twitter.com/bhschenker
LinkedIn
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Davide Migliavacca <
davide.migliava...@contactlab.com> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> >My URL request:
> https://postmaster.live.com/snds/data.aspx?key=----xxx&date=0201315&ip=1.2.3.4&sampletype=trap
>
> >I've checked and the IP shows trap hits
Hi John,
>My URL request:
>https://postmaster.live.com/snds/data.aspx?key=----xxx&date=0201315&ip=1.2.3.4&sampletype=trap
>I've checked and the IP shows trap hits on the specified date.
>What am I missing in my URL?
FWIW, I never actually saw a single trap sample o
On Apr 7, 2015, at 9:55 AM, chris wrote:
> We are not trying to avoid spam filters at all. We are simply trying to
> design our systems so that when something happens like a customers account
> getting compromised that once we can stop the cause that we can get the
> customers mail flowing ag
We are not trying to avoid spam filters at all. We are simply trying to
design our systems so that when something happens like a customers account
getting compromised that once we can stop the cause that we can get the
customers mail flowing again and they arent stuck waiting hours and days
for eac
On Apr 7, 2015, at 7:30 AM, chris wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a few linux webservers and which each send out SMTP directly .
> Currently, the webservers all relay the message directly to receipient and if
> it cant then it sends back a NDR to the sender advising the sender the
> message could
This looks promising. In answer to your question, forget the first part
about direct smtp delivery (we have no intention to keep this long term
this is just something we are playing with in our lab). Yes we want to have
a small group of centralized SMTP servers and the main capability we are
lookin
postfix has transport maps which would force delivery through another one
of your servers so that might be part of your solution. You also might be
able to do some manual requeuing and then restart the queues with a
different sendmail.cf file to a smart host after direct connection has
failed. For
On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 10:30:36AM -0400, chris wrote:
> I have a few linux webservers and which each send out SMTP directly .
> Currently, the webservers all relay the message directly to receipient and
> if it cant then it sends back a NDR to the sender advising the sender the
> message could not
On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 11:03:51AM -0400, chris wrote:
> What do MX records have to do with outbound SMTP delivery? Do you mean that
> if the webserver cant relay to to first MX record then try the secondary mx
> records? This still has the primary server trying and many recipients dont
> have mult
Hi,
I am attempting to get automated data with the IP and sampletype
information. This works ok as long as I specify the date. When I add the
&ip= and the &sampletype= all I get is a blank page.
My URL request:
https://postmaster.live.com/snds/data.aspx?key=----xxx&d
What do MX records have to do with outbound SMTP delivery? Do you mean that
if the webserver cant relay to to first MX record then try the secondary mx
records? This still has the primary server trying and many recipients dont
have multiple mx records or some that do dont always have them on differ
Yes i understand but forget direct delivery for a minute and how do I get
it so that if SMTP A cant relay then roll it over to SMTP B?
I dont want to just load balance smtp.yourdomain.com with multiple IPs so
that clients randomly choose a outbound server. I want it go down a group
of servers and
On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 10:30:36AM -0400, chris wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a few linux webservers and which each send out SMTP directly .
> Currently, the webservers all relay the message directly to
> receipient and if it cant then it sends back a NDR to the sender
> advising the sender the messa
Hello,
I have a few linux webservers and which each send out SMTP directly .
Currently, the webservers all relay the message directly to receipient and
if it cant then it sends back a NDR to the sender advising the sender the
message could not be delivered.
I want to scale this out a bit and add
19 matches
Mail list logo
