Why such mail would not be DKIM signed by Postfix when mail submitted
via the Postfix sendmail command is DKIM signed by Postfix probably
has to do with the Postfix/opendkim configuration and is not something
I can answer offhand.
If you think of anything, please let me know. I have
On 05/13/2012 01:39 AM, David wrote:
[snip]
If you think of anything, please let me know. I have been reading all
the DKIM related posts I can find, both on this list and other
places.
For a mailing list, would I have to expand my SigningTable in any
way?
No, as long as the list's
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Joe Sniderman
joseph.snider...@thoroquel.org wrote:
On 05/13/2012 01:39 AM, David wrote:
For a mailing list, would I have to expand my SigningTable in any
way?
No, as long as the list's domain is in your SigningTable.
OK.
If you want to sign outgoing
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.net wrote:
DKIM signing is normally done in an outgoing MTA. SPF and reverse DNS
are DNS things, not Mailman.
In general, best practices for Mailman servers are the same as best
practices for sending mail in general.
Mailman does
David wrote:
I have DKIM implemented with opendkim and Postfix and messages sent out via
sendmail are signed properly.
However, messages sent out to the list's users by Mailman are not DKIM
signed. Any suggestions?
Is Mailman sending outgoing mail via your local Postfix.
These headers from
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.net wrote:
David wrote:
I have DKIM implemented with opendkim and Postfix and messages sent out
via
sendmail are signed properly.
However, messages sent out to the list's users by Mailman are not DKIM
signed. Any suggestions?
David wrote:
For a mailing list, would I have to expand my SigningTable in any way? My
opendkim SigningTable currently only has an entry for
*@list.example.com(which is associated with list._
domainkey.example.com).
But /var/log/mail.log shows a lot of entries like this:
no signing table match
Mailman does have the ability to remove DKIM signatures from incoming
mail where Mailman might break these signatures by, e.g., prefixing
Subject: headers and/or adding list header or footer information to
message bodies, but this is controversial. Also, DKIM signing of
outgoing list mail is
On Fri, 11 May 2012, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
On the other hand we're getting spam reports for list mails (not
spam!) our users sent to a list. But since it's not spam we cannot
actually do anything about those mails while the LIST ADMIN could
easily unsubscribe the people reporting the spam.
* Geoff Shang ge...@quitelikely.com:
On Fri, 11 May 2012, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
On the other hand we're getting spam reports for list mails (not
spam!) our users sent to a list. But since it's not spam we cannot
actually do anything about those mails while the LIST ADMIN could
easily
On Wed, 9 May 2012 16:01:57 -0400
David d...@fiteyes.com wrote:
It seems to me that Mailman provides at least some of the intelligence (via
logs) that 37Signals custom developed on top of Postfix. Am I right? The
core suggestions seem to be universalL SPF records, DKIM signing, reverse
DNS
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Attila Kinali att...@kinali.ch wrote:
Getting to 99.9% delivery for a mailinglist is not difficult. Unless you
use it to manage your newsletter distribution.
The trick is: Do not force people onto your mailinglist. Make it a list
were most people are
David wrote:
The 37Signals article caught my attention. I would enjoy knowing others's
thoughts about how to apply these (or other) suggestions to Mailman.
It seems to me that Mailman provides at least some of the intelligence (via
logs) that 37Signals custom developed on top of Postfix. Am I
Is this an appropriate place to discuss the broader topic of how to best
use Mailman? Now that we have it running well, we would like to take
additional steps to ensure that the list's emails are delivered as well as
they can be.
The 37Signals article caught my attention. I would enjoy knowing
14 matches
Mail list logo
