LuKreme schrieb:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 3:42, Thomas Gelf tho...@gelf.net wrote:
the person who did not correctly set up the network is to be blamed,
if you have equipment acting as MTA it should be configured the right
way, otherwise use a relay server
SHOULD be blamed? Yes. But the
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 09:44 +0200, Robert Schetterer wrote:
LuKreme schrieb:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 3:42, Thomas Gelf tho...@gelf.net wrote:
the person who did not correctly set up the network is to be blamed,
if you have equipment acting as MTA it should be configured the right
way,
LuKreme wrote:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 3:42, Thomas Gelf tho...@gelf.net wrote:
the person who did not correctly set up the network is to be blamed,
if you have equipment acting as MTA it should be configured the right
way, otherwise use a relay server
SHOULD be blamed? Yes. But the blame
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:42:03 +0200
Thomas Gelf tho...@gelf.net wrote:
e) we are a really small ISP, but the largest one in our region. Two
years ago we decided to be less permissive - and we had to dedicate
ressources to teach people what they are doing wrong. The result
has been, that
brian moore wrote:
There is always the AOL Rule.
Yeah, we are sometimes also using AOL as an example, even if where I
live nearly nobody is using it...
(Hotmail and Gmail have similar rules, I just don't know where they
spell them out.)
Hotmail: http://postmaster.msn.com/Guidelines.aspx
Thomas Gelf schrieb:
brian moore wrote:
There is always the AOL Rule.
Yeah, we are sometimes also using AOL as an example, even if where I
live nearly nobody is using it...
(Hotmail and Gmail have similar rules, I just don't know where they
spell them out.)
Hotmail:
On Aug 4, 2009, at 3:42, Thomas Gelf tho...@gelf.net wrote:
the person who did not correctly set up the network is to be blamed,
if you have equipment acting as MTA it should be configured the
right
way, otherwise use a relay server
SHOULD be blamed? Yes. But the blame will fall on the
Mikael Bak wrote:
I'm currently blocking all attepmts to connect from hosts not having a
valid reverse DNS name with reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname.
...
Nevermind. To make it short: Is it ok to reject such sending servers or
not? :-)
In my believes using
When I was still managing an email system and got a complaint like
that. I'd actually contact the postmaster for the mail system with
the errors and let them know it's failing. Typically they'd just fix
it right up. Only once did I have someone argue with me over a
misconfigured mail server but
Robert Schetterer wrote, at 08/03/2009 03:40 PM:
lost mail to where ? gone universe *g?
the mail got rejected at last with a debug code
so the sender may take his brain to fix its problem
or try to reach you by phone , valid mailservers etc
if the sender cant fix it you can simply
Jorey Bump schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote, at 08/03/2009 03:40 PM:
lost mail to where ? gone universe *g?
the mail got rejected at last with a debug code
so the sender may take his brain to fix its problem
or try to reach you by phone , valid mailservers etc
if the sender cant fix it
On 3-Aug-2009, at 15:57, Robert Schetterer wrote:
yes i know many mailling services from big companies
who missed the reverse dns, but its their problem,
after all if they cant get out their mail it should finally bounce to
someone responsable
No, you're still not understanding.
Say you have
12 matches
Mail list logo
