On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 6:13 PM Michael Rathbun wrote:
>
> What's satisfying is that Harris Polls (now part of Nielsen), one of the
> earliest villains in the narrative, is now a client of mine, with
> subscription
> policies so restrictive that I wasn't able manually to subscribe a seed
> accoun
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Udeme Ukutt wrote:
> Please can a QQ (China) postmaster (or someone that knows one) contact me
> off-list? Thanks.
>
>
I'd be curious to know if you are successful. My recollection is they just
don't care if you are outside of China.
__
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 7:03 AM, wrote:
>
> dcsactrans2.verizon.com
>
> The hostname is invalid.
>
I'm curious what your FP rate is on this strict checking of the HELO host
name. I don't believe any of the major inbox providers do it, which should
be a clue it is not very accurate of a signal.
__
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> This doesn’t look so good, though:
>
> http://dnsviz.net/d/mail.mil/dnssec/
>
>
>
>
>
Yes, that looks bad :(
I have to learn more how to query/interpret my dns server's DNSSEC output,
or make it more strict.
___
My own office resolver running unbound has DNSSEC enabled with strict
checking, and the response I get shows it is authenticated data: the "ad"
flag is on. Based on that, DNSSEC is working for them as far as my
understanding goes. My first guess was also it would be a DNSSEC issue.
; <<>> DiG 9.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 6:26 PM, David Carriger <
david.carri...@infusionsoft.com> wrote:
> Yes, I'm still seeing this. So, an open question:
>
> As an ESP, how am I supposed to tell my users to practice good list
> hygiene and remove unengaged recipients from their lists when my data is
> being ta
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 1:43 AM, Philip Paeps wrote:
> Of course relays do get compromised from time to time, so peeking at the
> first hop is not a completely crazy thing for GSuites to do. But silently
> dropping the email after accepting feels a little disproportionate. Perhaps
> a 451 would b
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 2:23 AM, Emre Üst |euro.message| <
emre@euromsg.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone ,
>
> We are using Powermta(Port25) but their support service fee is rediciously
> high . We are looking for new mta . Could anyone recommend to Port25
> altenatives ?
>
>
Just before we got bou
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Ryan Prihoda
wrote:
>
> What about SPF, DMARC, DKIM ? I am sending 250k/day and only Earthlink
> seems to care. How many checks are actually necessary ?
>
>
You should look to implement SPF and DKIM for sure.
As for only earthlink seeming to care, how do you know
I recall at a M3AAWG meeting about a year ago this idea did not have much
enthusiasm.
One big issue will be dynamic values. For example, one IP might be allowed
more connections than another based on other historical data (aka
reputation). We also know that the published info on some of the postma
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:30 AM, David Hofstee
wrote:
> E.g. co-registration. In my opinion, many of the companies I met that did
> that, just use it for "want to win an Ipad? Register here". This translates
> to "spam me with your emails for a chance of happiness". So basically these
> emails ar
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> "lost connection with amazon-smtp.amazon.com [some_IP_address] while
> receiving the initial server greeting"
>
My first thought is some sort of timeout, or possibly a firewall rule
breaking the connection. Or maybe Amazon just hangs up on you
I've not had any issues with self signed certs with TLS on SMTP. That said,
lately I've been using Lets Encrypt certificates with the certbot program
to manage them, and that has worked really well. The initial setup takes a
little effort to do a DNS based verification since the mail hosts are not
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 4:16 PM, David Landers <
david.land...@livingsocial.com> wrote:
> I am attempting to change the reporting email address for the Yahoo! Complaint
> Feedback Loop (CFL) service, and submitting the new information via either
> an "Add" or "Update" request does not seem to be w
On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Chris Truitt wrote:
> My question to you is what can be done to essentially educate Smart Screen
> that our content, though containing medical jargon is acceptable to the end
> user and to place it into the inbox, and how many days of clean sending
> will it take t
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Carl Byington
wrote:
> Any ideas for debugging this?
>
Do your messages have non-ascii in them? If so, be sure to QP encode them,
otherwise some intermediate transit relays may muck up the signatures by
rewriting them.
___
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 12:11 PM, D'Arcy Cain wrote:
> Heck, we may not even need to do it. Enough coverage and the threat may
> get a bunch of them fixed anyway.
>
hahahaha. you are very optimistic.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://c
It has been reported here several times. Clearly nobody cares.
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Michael Wise via mailop
wrote:
>
>
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>
>
>
> Just a FYI.
>
>
>
> Aloha,
>
> Michael.
>
> --
>
> *Michael J Wise*
> Microsoft C
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Peer Heinlein <
p.heinl...@heinlein-support.de> wrote:
> I never received any feedbacks or complaints from Yahoo. I requested a
> FBL loop several times during the last few month.
>
My FBL still works, just goes to an address I'd like to retire. It was set
up so l
Off and on for the last two years or so, I've been trying to get my FBL
with yahoo updated to a new reporting address. It is becoming more urgent
now as we are changing the mail service which is currently just forwarding
the old reporting address internally.
At first I worked directly with ReturnP
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
> I'm feeling like the rep has absolutely no idea what DKIM is or how it
> works. As I don't have access to an AWeber account, can anyone tell me
> what (if any) support they have for SPF or DKIM signing?
>
> It's a small enough client that it s
My experience with qq in any way shape or form trying to contact their
postmaster is black hole. But I haven't tried in at least a year.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:38 PM, John Levine wrote:
> So just out of nosiness, when's the last time Something Bad Happened
> in real life due to sending credit card info by e-mail?
>
One of my buddies does design and consulting of networks for industries
regulated by federal statutes. By refusin
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Laura Atkins
wrote:
> Most mail-type folks (including the ProofPoint postmaster) were at a
> conference this week. Try mailing postmaster, they’re responsive to that
> mail.
>
I've rarely gotten response from Proofpoint, but usually the blocks are
cleared anyway
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Mark Dale wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're suddenly seeing a ton of NDRs for "Too many concurrent
> connections" when discussion-lists try to send email to "rr.com"
> addresses. Our MTA limit is for 2 concurrent connections.
>
>
I sat on a panel discussion a few M3AAWG mee
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Derek Diget
wrote:
> Anyone else seeing connection issues to AOL? Saturday morning (EST) we
> started getting
>
> 421 mtaig-maa03.mx.aol.com Service unavailable - try again later
>
> on the initial connection where the responding AOL hostname varies.
>
>
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Steve Freegard
wrote:
> I've had a report from a customer this morning regarding one of their
> customers messages being flagged as "Gmail couldn't verify that
> baerdijk.nl actually sent this message (and not a spammer)." despite
> having a correct SPF record at
Also no apparent problems here. None today, but last one was Jan 17
19:45:55.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Brandon Long wrote:
> Also, if your mail flow MX to google goes through multiple IPS, you should
> list them all as internal gateways.
>
Does it make sense to just remove my private relay server from the list of
gateways? It never receives and forwards mail from
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Brandon Long wrote:
> Are you a gsuite customer? If you are and designate an IP as your inbound
> gateway, then we'll assume the mail coming from there is inbound to us, and
> skip that IP and any internal IPS to try and find the real external IP.
>
Yes, we are
I have mail that comes from our in-house Jira which goes from the Jira
instance on 192.168.7.25 to a local postfix instance. This instance
forwards all mail to a public facing postfix using a public IP provided by
the firewall via NAT, 74.92.149.60, which ultimately delivers the mail to
gmail. The
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Kelly Molloy wrote:
> I realize that doesn't fit with your narrative that DNSBL operators
> care about nothing but punishing senders, but it is nonetheless true.
>
No, I was specific about SORBS, not all DNSBLs.
___
mail
On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Michelle Sullivan
wrote:
> Therefore, I'm not even going to discuss the issue of 'problem solved
>> within minutes' issue at this point as you will note the above covers where
>> this is likely to be true, as apposed to those (who we get on a regular
>> basis) who
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 9:01 PM, Noel Butler wrote:
> People go away, businesses shutdown over weekends etc, so you need time
> for them to find out they have a problem and resolve it.
>
>
That makes sense if you get no response from the affected sender. However,
if they are able to show you how t
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Michelle Sullivan
wrote:
> So taking your blatant attack literally which I was under the impression
> was against list policy, lets instead attempt to be constructive and have a
> clam discussion... "SORBS does not seem interested in solving problems,
> but in pun
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:40 PM, Tim Starr wrote:
> Is it just us, or others, too?
Ours are still coming in.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Bryan Vest wrote:
> If someone from SORBS could contact me off list or on list I don't care,
> either way we need to get this block removed.
>
How much trouble is it causing you? I find it doesn't cause all that much
trouble in terms of mail being blocked. SORBS d
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 12:01 PM, ComKal Networks
wrote:
> I've found them to be flexible the one time I stuffed up
> with a submission. The other time I stuffed up I simply
> emailed both parties to explain my blooper and apologised.
>
So you rescinded your complaint. Totally different situation
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 5:36 AM, Benoit Panizzon
wrote:
> 1: Mark those submissions to spamcop to be not spam, to prevent spamcop
>blocking the ip used to submit those reports.
> 2: Send a note to the reporter to get in contact with us to clear the
>issue, maybe the contact data @ RIPE is
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Paul Witting
wrote:
> Is this the tag you are referring to, if so, what are the other tags?
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6254652?hl=en
That's the feedback loop. It is based on tags provided in a
"Feedback-ID" header, which you DKIM sign.
_
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Paul Witting
wrote:
> Since discovering the issue we’ve been going over our system with a fine
> toothed comb, We generally have SPF and DKIM deployed, and based on Google’s
> recommendations, DMARC, as well as updating mail headers to be what seems to
> be in line
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Marco Franceschetti via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
> Or, could the new style approach be to blame?
>
Seems like your client should test the same subject line with and without
emoji and find out.
We have not studied yet the effect emoji in subject lines to
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
>o Use quoted-printable for all body text
>
This one bit me pretty well with AOL a few years ago -- rewriting of 8-bit
to 7-bit. The only solution was to QP encode everything.
___
mailop mailing
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 3:53 PM, David Sgro, Dataspindle
wrote:
> - A company called ProofPoint had my block along with several other
> neighboring /20's listed due to a SPAM incident that happened in 2013. Spoke
> to them. Very nice people. They understood and cleared it up right away.
> Yahoo
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Jay Hennigan wrote:
> address and phone number are "associated" with this account would be a good
> start. It could simply be someone with the same or a similar name and
> MyIDCare is being a bit too aggressive in their data mining, falsely
> "associating" your info
On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 12:19 PM, ryan prihoda wrote:
> Update: we seem to be ok with yahoo now and I have been in contact with
> others off list. Thanks to all. Moving forward, what are the best practices
> for priming a new IP ? We did some initial testing ,eg: Sent 1-2k mail
> through the new s
On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:09 PM, ryan prihoda wrote:
> We recently had to switch the IP on our "high volume" server , 200k email
> daily, and now we are being rate limited badly by AOL , Yahoo and Comcast
You might get some relief contacting AOL directly (open a postmaster
ticket), but I wouldn'
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 1:47 AM, Dave Warren wrote:
> A random thought, would it also be worth evaluating IPs that are not
> listed on a DUL as potential candidates? I realize DULs contain server
> space and other stuff that doesn't send mail, but it seems to me that
> most legitimate subscribers
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Brett Schenker wrote:
> We're currently looking to implement a combination of preventions with the
> leading idea being:
> honeypot on sign up pages + IP intelligence + email address intelligence +
> coi
>
> The idea being the honeypot will stop some bots, the IP m
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 7:21 PM, David Hubbard
wrote:
> The specific details are netblocks we’re deploying new servers on,
> previously unused, all seem to be on the block list by default.
How fast are you ramping up traffic on new IPs?
Also, what's the netblock? Maybe others can see issues in t
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Tim Starr wrote:
> The only benefit I can see from sending the exact same message from
> somewhere else would be to drive recipients to the same payload link, which
> suggests another possible way to stop this from paying off after detection:
> Make it so that all
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
> You're vouching for / accepting responsibility for every mail you sign.
> If your users are bad actors - as they are in this case - you're accepting
> responsibility for that.
So if I took any random message that I came upon signed by you an
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 7:22 PM, Michael Rathbun wrote:
> This server sends a spam feed to Spamcop (it's Nadine, in fact).
>
> So, of course, the IP is now listed on Spamcop.
No good deed...
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosig
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Anne Mitchell wrote:
> Or, perhaps, less is more?
Less is the opposite of more.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 3:53 AM, Chris via mailop wrote:
> I found that almost every customer (that responded) had no idea what
> happened when they clicked mark as spam - they thought the email just
> disappeared and that was that. They didn't realise that it triggers the
> feedback loop emails,
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Simon Forster
wrote:
> Spamhaus has the AuthBL whose purpose is to mitigate SMTP Auth abuse. It
> would be interesting to see if it’s of any use combatting this latest
> maliciousness. If anyone would like to test, contact me off list <
> fors...@spamteq.com> and
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Wise via mailop wrote:
> They're BURYING the target in thousands of confirmation requests.
>
In some cases we're seeing the recipient address repeatedly submitted, and
it is known to not exist, ie we get a DNE bounce.
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 9:46 PM, Mark Jeftovic wrote:
> I look at the complaint data, it's all weird looking signups, this time
> all from:
>
> aol.com
>
>
> netscape.net
>
>
> verizon.net
>
>
>
> and the "First Name Field" in all of them are like this:
>
> 5773fb91d07ad
>
> Again, looks automate
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Miles Fidelman
wrote:
> Which brings me back to my initial question - anybody from Comcast here,
> or can somebody point me at an appropriate contact at Comcast?
>
>
I wouldn't expect them to do anything special for you to help you track
this down. You're gonna ha
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Is there anybody here from Comcast mail operations who can provide some
> guidance as to how to identify the originator of an abuse report, so I can
> remove them from the list(s)?
>
If you VERP the SMTP envelope sender address, that shou
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:31 AM, Stefan Haunß wrote:
> however, IIRC there was also a M3AAWG BCP covering this questions.
>
I don't recall there being a BCP about this. There was a panel discussion
last week at the conference, and most people in attendance agreed that
there needs to be much more
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:45 AM, Rolf E. Sonneveld <
r.e.sonnev...@sonnection.nl> wrote:
> It is unlikely that the verdict will be different when the message is
> presented to the Gmail servers during the next queue run.
But not impossible, thus the only conclusion is that they want you to
retry
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Laura Atkins
wrote:
> You demonstrated the need for a flag day when you stated that the ESPs
> need to give the ISPs “a hint” that things are changing. Expecting every
> ESP to contact every ISP is ridiculous.
>
I don't have to contact anyone. I just add the hint
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Laura Atkins
wrote:
> The beauty of the proposal is that you can with some cooperation of the
> mail user agent convert the two-click unsub into a one-click.
>
>
> And the failure of this proposal is that it requires the MUA to change
> current behavior without a
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Laura Atkins
wrote:
> Also in this case, there is a significant chance that the proposal will
> result in sub-optimal or harmful results. It is a fact that there are
> appliances and filters out there that follow every link in an email.
> Implementing a protocol
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Michael Peddemors
wrote:
> Putting your business card in a bowl to win a prize is definitely not
> giving permission to get on a mailing list ;)
>
I for one pretty much expect that I'll be put on a list. I'm sure a lot of
other folk do, too.
_
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Joel Beckham wrote:
> Thanks, Vick. I'm curious, what initially lead you to exclude the
> message-id from your signature?
>
We sign in our application, and let the MTA throw in the Message-ID. Always
did it that way. I also let the MTA insert the required Date h
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Al Iverson
wrote:
> I've heard John Levine propose the "hidden link to catch scanning
> robots" solution but I've never heard of an email system implementing
>
I'm running through my head how that would work, and makes for some very
complicated state transition d
as
> Been Processed." | Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool
> <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ?
>
>
>
> *From:* mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] *On Behalf Of *Vick
> Khera
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 25, 2016 2:14 PM
> *To:* Erw
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Erwin Harte wrote:
> I did a spot check of a recent attack. The email address was
> jabradb...@kanawhascales.com and it got signed up to 12 lists during May
> 17 and 18. Amazingly, whoever is on the other end of that address clicked
> to confirm every one of those
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Michael Wise
wrote:
> Are these IP addresses on CBL?
>
I did a spot check of a recent attack. The email address was
jabradb...@kanawhascales.com and it got signed up to 12 lists during May 17
and 18. Amazingly, whoever is on the other end of that address clicked
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Al Iverson
wrote:
> Which ESPs operate that way? (Hint: none. Most ESPs offer COI, few or
> none require it.)
>
All our direct signup forms are only COI. We do permit customers to import
existing lists, which may or may not have been COI previously, though we
su
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Jay Hennigan
wrote:
> The appearance of the confirmation email makes a big difference. If it
> looks like an advertisement with lots of graphics, hidden tracking bugs,
> etc. it's likely to be viewed as abuse and used by bad guys to harass
> innocents.
>
> I'm ver
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Matthew Black
wrote:
> Are your customers using confirmed opt-in mailing lists? If not, they
> should not be running mailing lists.
>
>
Yes, the only effect is to send a confirmation message, which is quite
generic and at most contains the customer's logo and nam
As an ESP, we host mailing list signup forms for many customers. Of late,
it appears they have been getting pounded on with fraudulent signups for
real addresses. Sometimes the people confirm by clicking the confirmation
link in the message and we are left scratching our heads as to why they
would
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Jeffry Dwight
wrote:
> I can't figure out how to tell the
> difference between a "real" untrusted root and a cert issued by some
> admin's
> personal CA.
>
Because there is none.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.or
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jeffry Dwight
wrote:
> So, what do you all do? Right now, I'm verifying the cert and its chain,
> but
> ignoring CN mismatches. That seems to be fine for ensuring encryption, but
> rather defeats the purpose of knowing we're connecting to the proper
> server.
>
>
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Vladimir Dubrovin via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
> We observe this behavior periodically and it seems the number of lost
> connections still grows.
>
> < *@yahoo.com
>
> >: delivery temporarily suspended: lost connection
> with
> mta5.am0.yahoodns.
On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 2:05 AM, Renaud Allard via mailop
wrote:
> I never heard of truncate DNSBL before but it's easy to get over 95%
> spam if they have only a few "sniffers", just send one unique message
> looking spammy to their "sniffers", and you are good to go with 100% spam.
>
They also
My monitoring service just notified me that an IP from my shared general
outbound pool is listed on the Truncate DNSBL. This is really the first
I've heard of this list. From what I read on their web pages, they claim
that an IP is only listed if > 95% of the mail they detect is spam. I
personally
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Brandon Long via mailop
wrote:
> In a perfect world, there would be an aliases interface as a simpler way
> to set this up. Using this maintains the sender, doesn't add list-*
> headers, lets DKIM still pass, etc.
No kidding! 99.44% of my groups are just there
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
> I would, if I could pay for just the actual users. Sadly, I have too many
> other things that need mailboxes and/or accounts for other purposes and I
> just can't justify paying for each of them.
>
I use google groups for those things. You can
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> Sorry if this is off topic, but I'm just curious what folks are using for
> webmail nowadays.
>
Before we went all-in with Google Apps, we used Roundcube.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
ht
Did you check the DNS remotely (there are lots of public servers to probe)
vs at your own DNS servers?
Providing a real example would help others help you, as clearly something
is wrong somewhere.
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Pascal Herbert
wrote:
> Hallo,
> Google is currently rejecting mai
It's likely that ARC will become the new - much better - workaround
> eventually, modulo the inevitable deployment issues. http://arc-spec.org
>
> Cheers,
> Steve
>
> >
> > Frank
> >
> > From: mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] On Behalf Of Vick Kher
ers are accessing
your service via an API.
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Vick Khera wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
>>
>>> So if you've been doing anything special with forwarders or mailing
>>> lists for
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
> So if you've been doing anything special with forwarders or mailing lists
> for yahoo.com
>
> it's probably a good idea to do it for their other domains too in the next
> few days.
>
When Y! first set up p=reject on their main domain, we bui
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> Anyone else seeing the same?
>
Yes, for some of it. It looks like more is going through than not going
through.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/l
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Carl Byington wrote:
> Yes, arin.net
>
> failed to renew the dnssec signatures on 65.in-addr.arpa.
> They have expired, and anyone behind a dnssec enforcing resolver can no
> longer see ptr records in that tree.
>
Looks to be corrected now. It resolves for both my
89 matches
Mail list logo
