I would imagine that list-id or list-unsubscribe would allow for discrimination by the type of mail sent by a sender. Ie, a host like Google Groups or Yahoo Groups has millions of different silos, and it would make sense to treat those differently.
And we definitely combine signals in multiple ways. You've stripped any identifying information from that response, so I can't investigate more to know what's actually going on, but feel free to contact me off list with more information and I can take a look to see if we have an issue. Brandon On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Gil Bahat <[email protected]> wrote: > I'll admit to not having done this yet, for three reasons: > > one, given that I found no other references of it here or trawling the > web, it's very likely to be a 'last straw' thing and that there's a much > deeper root cause which needs to be caught first. > two, in relation to one, our toolset is still limited and that includes > our ability to shut down specific headers easily. case in point is that > just bringing those back to life took effort by itself... > and last, I don't want to trouble my users unnecessarily. I don't have > enough pristine gmail boxes available that haven't previously interacted > with this sender so all testing would have to be done at the expense of > users. I'm pretty sure going by that order would yield better results > anyway. > > I think the right way to go about it is like a glacier - assume this > message is representative of x20 more silent rejections and search for a > systematic problem. > > (as an aside, I do have to say it's contradictory to the devops mindset of > (tongue-in-cheek) 'monitoring/log entry or it didn't happen' and it's a bit > jarring to try and maintain the two together). > > Regards, > > Gil Bahat, > DevOps/Postmaster, > Magisto Ltd. > > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:08 PM, John Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >We've been using these headers for over a year with the previous ESP. it >> is >> >nothing inherent to the headers per se, it's a correlation of these >> headers >> >and other factors. but one of these headers does seem to carry a penalty >> or >> >otherwise skews detection. >> >> When you did experiments removing one header at a time to see which one is >> causing trouble, what did you find out? >> >> R's, >> John >> > > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > [email protected] > http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop > >
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop
