On 28 Feb 2019, at 14:33, Mike Marynowski wrote:
But scconsult.com does in fact have a website so I'm not sure what you
mean. This method checks the *root* domain, not the subdomain.
Ah, I see. I had missed that detail.
That's likely to have fewer issues, as long as you get the registry
boundary correct. SA actually helps with that: see
Mail::SpamAssassin::RegistryBoundaries.
Even if this wasn't the case well, it is what it is. Emails from this
mailing list (and most well configured lists) come in at a spam score
of -6, so they are no risk of being blocked even if a non-website
domain triggers this particular rule.
On 2/28/2019 2:25 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
On 28 Feb 2019, at 13:43, Mike Marynowski wrote:
On 2/28/2019 12:41 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
You should probably put the envelope sender (i.e. the SA
"EnvelopeFrom" pseudo-header) into that list, maybe even first.
That will make many messages sent via discussion mailing lists
(such as this one) pass your test where a test of real header
domains would fail, while it it is more likely to cause commercial
bulk mail to fail where it would usually pass based on real
standard headers. (That's based on a hunch, not testing.)
Can you clarify why you think my currently proposed headers would
fail with the mailing list? As far as I can tell, all the messages
I've received from this mailing list would pass just fine. As an
example from the emails in this list, which header value
specifically would cause it to fail?
If I did not explicitly set the Reply-To header, this message would
be delivered without one. The domain part of the From header on
messages I post to this and other mailing lists has no website and
never will.
