>>>So doing a DNS check will not help much in verifying an account
>
>I just checked my list via dns using worldcast and about 10% failed, but many with messages about not having an IP they can reverse look-up, so useless.
Yes, one thing that gets checked by most servers now is to make sure the mail coming in is from another mail server, which should have a reverse lookup of its IP address. If there is a reverse lookup response then it is often checked against lists of dial-up lines, etc., to again confirm that it another mail server, not a consumer machine. The re4verse name of the mail server should not have to match the email's sending domain name but it should match the name the mail server itself identified itself as. That should stop email coming in from home machines and other suspect sources.
>Kym, very helpful. Hard to know what emails are getting rejected for exactly what, or just tossed, so what do estimate the hourly threshhold is for big guys like AOL, Hotmail, etc? I have a list of 3000 subscribers and have been trickling it out at only 300/hour out of paranoia.
Send it full-blast to everyone except the big three and pick up on who bounces what and then modify the feed rate to match. That means you need two streams to send but that should not be too hard. For the big three the rules are dirfferent and constanlty change as they try to keep ahead of thr SPAMmers but they do publish their restrictions (go to places like: http://postmaster.info.aol.com/ to find out)
>Also, do you think the presence of a localhost IP ("from 127.0.0.1 for [ISP IP]" etc.) and the coldfusion name as the sending program in the header is a big spam filter problem?
At one time the word Allaire would cause an email to be stopped by some email servers as they were fussy about engines that could send bulk quantities of email but were not email servers themselves but that should no longer be the case. As to things like private IP addresses in the headers it should be OK in the first line or two as the mail gets out of a system into the larger world but records with private IP addresses after that it could be treated as suspicious.
>One thing that annoys me is I send via my local IPS account with a reply-to for our domain, and a certain percentage of hosts rejects that as "no relaying". That's not relaying. Or maybe it's the localhost IP in there, not sure.
What some servers look for is a match between the source domains in the headers and they should not do so as having a "ReplyTo:" that goes to a different place than the sender is not an improper thing. It is often the result of poor configuration but getting it fixed is not easy :-)
--
Yours,
Kym
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
