On 5 May 2016, at 22:24, Bill Cole wrote:
[ blah blah blah ]
OR: I was entirely wrong about the broken SPF records being the cause of
that rejection.
Noel & Christian were right in pointing you at the access maps. You
MIGHT also run into the SPF issue after exempting that sender from the
sh
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 10:24:49PM -0400, Bill Cole wrote:
> >I discovered this issue in their DNS with respect to SPF:
> >
> >;; ANSWER SECTION:
> >lymanworldwide.com. 1800IN TXT "v=spf1
> >include:netcore.co.in -all"
> >lymanworldwide.com. 1800IN TXT "v=spf1
> >
On 5 May 2016, at 11:57, James B. Byrne wrote:
On Thu, May 5, 2016 11:34, James B. Byrne wrote:
Can anyone clue me in on what configuration issue might be causing
this and whose configuration it is, mine or theirs?
postfix-p25/smtpd[18149]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
smout-245174.nsmailserv.co
On Thu, May 5, 2016 12:37, Christian Kivalo wrote:
>
> There it is: lymanworldwide.com uses nameservices provided by
> name-services.com
>
Thanks, that is it. I suppose we will just have to explicitly permit
them in. Not that I approve of their choice of registrars (enom).
Thanks for the help.
Am 5. Mai 2016 18:30:40 MESZ, schrieb "James B. Byrne" :
>
>On Thu, May 5, 2016 12:11, Christian Kivalo wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 5. Mai 2016 17:34:36 MESZ, schrieb "James B. Byrne"
>> :
>>>Can anyone clue me in on what configuration issue might be causing
>>>this and whose configuration it is, mine or
On Thu, May 5, 2016 12:11, Christian Kivalo wrote:
>
>
> Am 5. Mai 2016 17:34:36 MESZ, schrieb "James B. Byrne"
> :
>>Can anyone clue me in on what configuration issue might be causing
>>this and whose configuration it is, mine or theirs?
>>
>>postfix-p25/smtpd[18149]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
>
On 5/5/2016 10:34 AM, James B. Byrne wrote:
> Can anyone clue me in on what configuration issue might be causing
> this and whose configuration it is, mine or theirs?
>
> postfix-p25/smtpd[18149]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> smout-245174.nsmailserv.com[202.162.245.174]: 450 4.7.1
> : Sender addre
Am 5. Mai 2016 17:34:36 MESZ, schrieb "James B. Byrne" :
>Can anyone clue me in on what configuration issue might be causing
>this and whose configuration it is, mine or theirs?
>
>postfix-p25/smtpd[18149]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
>smout-245174.nsmailserv.com[202.162.245.174]: 450 4.7.1
>: Sen
try use "~all" instead of "-all" in your SPF txt record.
On 16-05-05 08:57 AM, James B. Byrne wrote:
On Thu, May 5, 2016 11:34, James B. Byrne wrote:
Can anyone clue me in on what configuration issue might be causing
this and whose configuration it is, mine or theirs?
postfix-p25/smtpd[18149
On Thu, May 5, 2016 12:01, Gao wrote:
> try use "~all" instead of "-all" in your SPF txt record.
>
We are not the sender. We are the recipient. Our SPF record does not
bear on this issue insofar as I can see. In any case, our SPF TXT RR
already includes ~all, not -all.
--
*** e-Mail
On Thu, May 5, 2016 11:34, James B. Byrne wrote:
> Can anyone clue me in on what configuration issue might be causing
> this and whose configuration it is, mine or theirs?
>
> postfix-p25/smtpd[18149]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> smout-245174.nsmailserv.com[202.162.245.174]: 450 4.7.1
> : Sender
Can anyone clue me in on what configuration issue might be causing
this and whose configuration it is, mine or theirs?
postfix-p25/smtpd[18149]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
smout-245174.nsmailserv.com[202.162.245.174]: 450 4.7.1
: Sender address rejected: Access denied;
from= to=
proto=ESMTP helo=
12 matches
Mail list logo
