Trying to help someone on another team debug a problem with connection
to Amazon. The sender domain has accurate SPF, and mail is being
accepted at most sites (including notoriously picky ones like Google).
However when they try to send to Amazon they get an error message:
"lost connection wit
On 2017-08-07 14:09, Steve Atkins wrote:
Try connecting manually to the MX from a shell on the smarthost too.
If they can connect to port 25 and get a banner that's a very useful
data point.
https://wordtothewise.com/2010/06/basic-email-delivery-telnet/
This is not definitive because I don't
On 2017-08-07 15:25, Eric Tykwinski wrote:
On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:01 PM, Doug Barton
wrote:
On 2017-08-07 14:09, Steve Atkins wrote:
Try connecting manually to the MX from a shell on the smarthost too.
If they can connect to port 25 and get a banner that's a very useful
data point.
Y'all might want to be aware that this issue is being discussed on the
NANOG list. In the age of Let's Encrypt expired TLS certs are a really
bad look.
On 9/12/18 6:24 AM, Matt Gilbert via mailop wrote:
Hey gang,
I was showing mailop to a new member of my team, and when I went to show
them w
So leaving aside the discussion of specific TLS solutions, how do we get
the list admin on the line to fix this?
On 10/25/18 8:50 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
Y'all might want to be aware that this issue is being discussed on the
NANOG list. In the age of Let's Encrypt expired TLS c
On 3/1/15 2:47 PM, John Levine wrote:
(1) example.com. MX 23 primary.example.com.
example.com. MX 42 backup.example.com.
backup.example.com. A/
backup.example.com. A/
Here I presume you meant to have two A records for
primary.example.com.
A n
That's a different category of problem. :) Obviously when you get large
enough you want to have more than one critical facility. But the idea of
a "main" data center and a "backup" data center is very 20th Century.
Hot/hot with well-tested failover procedures is the way to go.
Doug
On 3/1/1
On 3/1/15 11:07 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
On 2015-03-01 17:56, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 10:47:12PM -, John Levine wrote:
By the way, why do you have a backup MX? [snip]
He's right. There's no reason for this anymore. All MX's should
be precisely equivalent in terms of
On 5/29/15 5:34 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
If they all point to much the same cluster of servers, it simply means
those servers get retried two or three times per set of MX lookups. It
is a quick and dirty hack but well, it works fairly fine without
treating a single failure as a timeout
On 5/29/15 9:09 PM, Michael Wise wrote:
Also, just so you know, bug or feature, you decide:
Something about your message caused my Outlook Mobile to crash when I tried to
reply at first.
Perhaps this is by design, I don't know.
No, it was almost certainly the PGP/MIME signature I mentioned in
,
Michael.
--
Sent from my Windows Phone
--------
From: Doug Barton <mailto:dougb@dougbarton.email>
Sent: 5/29/2015 9:33 PM
To: Michael Wise <mailto:michael.w...@microsoft.com>; mailop@mailop.org
<mailto:mailop@mailop.org>
Subj
On 03/02/2016 06:01 PM, Franck Martin via mailop wrote:
This tool is cool for finding issues on mail servers
https://ssl-tools.net/mailservers
Neat tool, thanks for sharing. :)
Doug
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.
I don't see it listed there ...
On 03/08/2016 06:40 AM, Franck Martin via mailop wrote:
The outage is listed at https://ianix.com/pub/dnssec-outages.html
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 6:21 AM, Vick Khera mailto:vi...@khera.org>> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Carl Byington mailto:c...@f
host isn't really designed for DNS debugging, beyond telling you what
your resolver chain knows about the record you're asking for. In your
examples it is helpfully showing you what it does know about the record,
which it its PTR.
In your dig example you're getting exactly what you asked for,
No worries :)
On 03/08/2016 01:28 PM, Michael Wise wrote:
Yes, noticed the ARIN involvement, and went to wash my hands, so to speak.
It's been a while since I was mucking about with DNS stuffs...
Aloha,
Michael.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mai
Further info:
http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2016-March/030726.html
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Sorry if this is off topic, but I'm just curious what folks are using
for webmail nowadays.
Doug
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
So this seems bad if you are running any kind of CGI (especially PHP, say on a
webmail platform) where a user might call out to a third party URL.
https://httpoxy.org (https://httpoxy.org)
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal
On 03/25/2017 06:36 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 03/24/2017 09:44 PM, John Levine wrote:
Sure, but the arguments we're seeing at ICANN are way beyond
reasonable. Everyone thinks it's important to protect the personal
information of people, but most domains are not registered by people.
Tha
On 03/25/2017 04:47 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
And maybe figure out which registrar it is that is trying to steal their
customers and using whatever process ICANN has to stop them.
I'm not familiar with the issue that you're referring to.
On 26-Mar-2017, at 2:00 AM, D
FYI, you removed the attribution of the statement you're replying to
here. That's generally considered rude in e-mail list circles.
On 03/25/2017 05:02 PM, Al Iverson wrote:
And to John's objection to privacy for companies in another
message, your outlook is unrealistic. It's often very importan
John, I know you know better than to remove the attribution of the quote
you're replying to ...
On 03/25/2017 05:20 PM, John Levine wrote:
When it comes to privacy I'm much more concerned about the most
vulnerable folks not being required to publish their residential address
and personal phone
On 03/26/2017 01:58 PM, John Levine wrote:
But I can't help noticing that people keep trying to change the topic.
Not changing the topic, refuting your statement that no one needs their
own domain name to communicate on the Internet.
Once again, nobody* has a problem with privacy protection
FYI
Forwarded Message
Subject: Obsolete NSA exploit for Postfix 2.0 - 2.2
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2017 16:18:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Wietse Venema
To: Postfix users
CC: Postfix announce
A recent twitter post reveals the existence of an exploit for Postfix,
in a collection of what app
I'm starting to see requests for BIMI DNS records from clients. Is it a
thing yet? I'm not opposed to being an early (or early'ish) adopter, but
are there any caveats? Has anyone gone through the Verified Mark
Certificate process? Any other thoughts?
Doug
_
25 matches
Mail list logo
