On 2018-09-14 10:36, Dominic Raferd wrote:
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 07:14, Benny Pedersen <m...@junc.eu> wrote:
Benny Pedersen skrev den 2018-09-14 08:08:
Dominic Raferd skrev den 2018-09-14 07:33:
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 00:29, Julian Opificius
<jo397...@barnlea.com>
wrote:
Why is it that my system marks everything from you as spam, Benny?
Is
it
your tld? I've added you to my address book, but my server keeps
spitting you out.
Because the domain that he uses to send emails through this mailing
list has DMARC p=quarantine setting:
# dig +short _dmarc.junc.eu TXT
"v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:report_...@dmarc.junc.eu; fo=d;
adkim=r; aspf=r; sp=none"
postfix maillist is dkim safe, so if it breaks, show the link that
breaks it, whitelist postfix maillist so it does not go into
quarantine
can i help more ?
i get dmarc pass back on my post here
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 linode.junc.eu 2C5B31BE06F
Authentication-Results: linode.junc.eu; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine
dis=none) header.from=junc.eu
Authentication-Results: linode.junc.eu;
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=junc.eu header.i=@junc.eu
header.b=Aedk3uHj;
dkim-atps=neutral
Received-SPF: none (postfix.org: No applicable sender policy
available)
receiver=localhost.junc.eu; identity=mailfrom;
envelope-from="owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org";
helo=russian-caravan.cloud9.net; client-ip="2604:8d00:0:1::4"
Sorry you are right: your emails pass DKIM and also, when going through
postfix mailing list (but not all others), pass DKIM alignment, so they
pass DMARC. However, when sent through mailing lists, they fail SPF,
and (for DMARC) SPF alignment, so servers that make decisions based
only on this (which is not the DMARC way) may choose to treat them as
spam. Mine don't, but I have seen your emails quarantined (or,
previously, blocked) on other mailing lists, hence my original comment.
I think the postfix ML is not so "DKIM safe". In my case, it causes my
DKIM signature to fail. I have now compared a message sent by me against
other messages sent e.g. by Benny Pedersen, and concluded that my
configuration (using rspamd) was signing way too many fields. I have now
reduced the number of fields and hopefully this message should now come
back from the postfix ML with a valid DKIM signature.
So in a way this message is just a test, but hopefully also a
clarification :)
Cheers,
Bernardo Reino.
