Would we actually miss any real emails if our mail server
started rejecting all emails from .top, .win and .xyz TLDs?
I'm sure there are also some others you can name :-)
Also, what is the current consensus on rejecting messages
from "bare" IP addresses without a name in DNS?
--
/* * * Otto J.
On Mon Apr 18 13:41:55 2016, Otto J. Makela wrote:
> Also, what is the current consensus on rejecting messages
> from "bare" IP addresses without a name in DNS?
Hi,
About everybody is dropping mails coming from a reverseless IP.
--
alarig
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:41:55PM +0300, Otto J. Makela wrote:
> Would we actually miss any real emails if our mail server
> started rejecting all emails from .top, .win and .xyz TLDs?
I don't think it's a good idea to reject any TLDs with open registration.
BTW, Alphabet is at abc.xyz..
> Als
Otto J. Makela wrote:
Would we actually miss any real emails if our mail server
started rejecting all emails from .top, .win and .xyz TLDs?
I'm sure there are also some others you can name :-)
Dunno about .top, but not seen anything legit coming from .xyz and the
other one... well has to be a
Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:41:55PM +0300, Otto J. Makela wrote:
Would we actually miss any real emails if our mail server
started rejecting all emails from .top, .win and .xyz TLDs?
I don't think it's a good idea to reject any TLDs with open registration.
BTW, Alphabet
Hi
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:41:55 +0300
"Otto J. Makela" wrote:
> Would we actually miss any real emails if our mail server
> started rejecting all emails from .top, .win and .xyz TLDs?
> I'm sure there are also some others you can name :-)
Maybe not at the moment.
Doing that would make sure they
On 18 Apr 2016, at 8:28, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:41:55PM +0300, Otto J. Makela wrote:
Would we actually miss any real emails if our mail server
started rejecting all emails from .top, .win and .xyz TLDs?
I don't think it's a good idea to re
On 16-04-18 08:28 AM, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
(3) NXDOMAIN = No Records = Hard Fail
(2) SERVFAIL = DNS issues = Temp Fail
Connection timeout/Refused = DNS issues = Temp Fail
+1
As to the issues of the worst tld's for spamming, eg..
.xyz
.win
.download
.space
.review
.faith
.. and on and on .
We do send mail from abc.xyz, though it's pretty minimal... some investor
stuff, I think.
Otherwise, I tend to think that blanket bans like this or banning all
Chinese IPs tend to be fine for really small servers (ie, personal
servers), but unlikely to be what you want for larger servers. There's
I've shared an item with you:
Daily Insight RepMan 4/18 Weekly Report
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5uXLOoVt66DdDVXaUZ1Q3otRW8/view?usp=sharing&invite=CK6Siv0M&ts=571516f0
It's not an attachment -- it's stored online. To open this item, just click
the link above.
Hey Team,
Here's your W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 17:28 +0200, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> (3) NXDOMAIN = No Records = Hard Fail
> (2) SERVFAIL = DNS issues = Temp Fail
> Connection timeout/Refused = DNS issues = Temp Fail
I agree. But some providers seem to have trouble with t
/facepalm
/facepalm type=double
... um, yeah.
I'll poke someone with a (very sharp) stick over that directly, thanks!
Aloha,
Michael.
--
Michael J Wise | Microsoft | Spam Analysis | "Your Spam Specimen Has Been
Processed." | Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool ?
-Original Message-
From:
I'm about ready to reject anything from or even mentioning .top. I am
getting tons of .top spam recently. It appears to be all from one
certain spammer, who is rotating through .top domain names. Example
domains from the last hour include serag.top, sopicasdws.top,
tolaw.top, tumie.top, wrazz.top a
Sorry group ignore my last post, as I errantly sent a message to the wrong
"mailops"! My apologies.
Thanks,
Dickie LaFlamme / Deliverability Specialist
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailo
On Mon Apr 18 12:53:07 2016, Carl Byington wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 17:28 +0200, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> > (3) NXDOMAIN = No Records = Hard Fail
> > (2) SERVFAIL = DNS issues = Temp Fail
> > Connection timeout/Refused = DNS issues = Te
On 4/18/16 2:31 PM, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
On Mon Apr 18 12:53:07 2016, Carl Byington wrote:
I agree. But some providers seem to have trouble with the concept of
setting up proper reverse dns for all their outbound servers.
Apr 18 12:23:23 ns1 sendmail[23389]: u3IJNMG3023389: --- 250-ns1.five-
It's possible that the issue has been corrected already.
-Original Message-
From: mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] On Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:44 PM
To: mailop@mailop.org
Subject: Re: [mailop] "Spammer TLDs" and IP addresses without a reverse?
On 4/18
It hasn't.
I'm still trying to bring it to the attention of the responsible parties.
Aloha,
Michael.
--
Michael J Wise | Microsoft | Spam Analysis | "Your Spam Specimen Has Been
Processed." | Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool ?
-Original Message-
From: mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailo
On 2016-04-18 10:38, Michael Peddemors wrote:
Registrars paid a lot of money to be able to offer TLD's and they
shouldn't really be punished just because they are cheaper than other
domains.
Personally, I'm going to start adding points to any TLD that offers
first-year-cheap discounts as the
19 matches
Mail list logo
