On 12/6/21 1:02 PM, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
In general, Linode is not a bad place.. However, you should ask them to
provide you 'rwhois' for your IP Address.
Linode didn't offer rwhois nor SWIP when I asked them about it O(18)
months ago. I'd love to learn if that has changed.
On 06/12/2021 21:02, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
In general, Linode is not a bad place.. However, you should ask them to
provide you 'rwhois' for your IP Address.
What do you mean with "rwhois"?
Most of the bad IP(s) are compromised servers, you might have just got
the bad luck of the
On 06/12/2021 21:09, Mary via mailop wrote:
I had the same experience with outlook.com and servers hosted by
many cloud providers, including Linode.
The solution with Linode is very simple, just open a ticket and
they'll get in touch with M$ and you'll be added into their
whitelist. It usually
A worthwhile note is that, at least in my experience, the messaging
there can be a bit misleading. I've removed my old blog where I proved
it with logs, but what it basically amounted to was this: I have many
times received that exact error, and had the next email accepted by
their systems less
I had the same experience with outlook.com and servers hosted by many cloud
providers, including Linode.
The solution with Linode is very simple, just open a ticket and they'll get in
touch with M$ and you'll be added into their whitelist. It usually takes 2
business days.
Just make sure to h
In general, Linode is not a bad place.. However, you should ask them to
provide you 'rwhois' for your IP Address.
Most of the bad IP(s) are compromised servers, you might have just got
the bad luck of the draw.
But frankly.. what are you planning to do with it?
http://grinta.net/
PS, turn o
Hello,
is outlook.com blocking all Linode IPv4 space or am I just unlucky?
eur.olc.protection.outlook.com[104.47.18.225] said: 550 5.7.1
Unfortunately, messages from [109.74.203.128] weren't sent. Please contact
your Internet service provider since part of their network is on our bl
Hi,
Dňa Sun, 5 Dec 2021 19:51:15 + ml+mailop--- via mailop
napísal:
> "What's the problem you are trying to solve?"
Basically no problem here. I never seen message with unqualified
postmaster (RCPT). To be honest, i miss this part of RFC before.
I only try to understand, how to deal with u
On 2021-12-06 at 05:12:27 UTC-0500 (Mon, 6 Dec 2021 11:12:27 +0100)
Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop
is rumored to have said:
Dnia 5.12.2021 o godz. 18:58:21 Fernando Cassia via mailop pisze:
Emails sent to the phased out domains, Roadrunner.com or
rr.com, are being flagged by email providers as spam
Dnia 5.12.2021 o godz. 18:58:21 Fernando Cassia via mailop pisze:
> Emails sent to the phased out domains, Roadrunner.com or
> rr.com, are being flagged by email providers as spam or used as spam
> traps.
I wonder what this sentence might mean. Emails sent to @rr.com are marked as
spam... by whom
*From: *Slavko via mailop
*Subject: *Re: [mailop] postmaster: envelope vs header
I think a little about it, but i cannot find other way than do not use
To: header at all, which will be penalized in my anti-spam SW latter.
How about
To: Postmaster :;
11 matches
Mail list logo
