Re: [mailop] Timeouts on "." sending to nic.ru

2017-11-14 Thread Mark Milhollan
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Brandon Long wrote: >On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 10:58 AM Renaud Allard via mailop >wrote: >>Actually, it's way more than that: >> Initial 220 Message: 5 Minutes >> MAIL Command: 5 Minutes >> RCPT Command: 5 Minutes >> DATA Initiation: 2 Minutes >> Data

Re: [mailop] Timeouts on "." sending to nic.ru

2017-11-14 Thread Stefano Bagnara
On 14 November 2017 at 23:18, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote: > On 14/11/2017 22:59, Brandon Long via mailop wrote: >> Ugh, those timeouts are insane, from a different era. > > Taken straight out of RFC5321 tough, but yes, indeed, that RFC is from 2008. That paragraph is

Re: [mailop] Timeouts on "." sending to nic.ru

2017-11-14 Thread Renaud Allard via mailop
On 14/11/2017 22:59, Brandon Long via mailop wrote: Ugh, those timeouts are insane, from a different era. Brandon Taken straight out of RFC5321 tough, but yes, indeed, that RFC is from 2008. quote: "Based on extensive experience with busy mail-relay hosts, the minimum per-command timeout

Re: [mailop] Timeouts on "." sending to nic.ru

2017-11-14 Thread Brandon Long via mailop
Ugh, those timeouts are insane, from a different era. Brandon On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 10:58 AM Renaud Allard via mailop wrote: > > > On 14/11/2017 16:51, Jeremy Harris wrote: > > On 14/11/17 13:16, Vladimir Dubrovin via mailop wrote: > >> > >> Timeout after "." on smaller

Re: [mailop] Timeouts on "." sending to nic.ru

2017-11-14 Thread Renaud Allard via mailop
On 14/11/2017 16:51, Jeremy Harris wrote: On 14/11/17 13:16, Vladimir Dubrovin via mailop wrote: Timeout after "." on smaller messages and in the middle of transmission on large-size messages usually mean TCP connection issues, most common reason is PMTUD blackhole router problem. On any

[mailop] DHL.com email admin contact?

2017-11-14 Thread Joe Klein
Hey list! Does anyone have an email admin contact for dhl.com (or .de given the RTT I'm seeing from their MTA) Having a problem with one of their MTA's not DKIM signing emails and these emails are getting rejected by my client's mailbox provider because dhl.com's DMARC is set to REJECT. These

Re: [mailop] Timeouts on "." sending to nic.ru

2017-11-14 Thread Jeremy Harris
On 14/11/17 13:16, Vladimir Dubrovin via mailop wrote: > > Timeout after "." on smaller messages and in the middle of transmission > on large-size messages usually mean TCP connection issues, most common > reason is PMTUD blackhole router problem. On any size message they can be due to a

Re: [mailop] A proposal for automated management of mail sending limits

2017-11-14 Thread Ken O'Driscoll
On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 10:05 +0100, David Hofstee wrote: > I agree that it is a problem. I do think this could be done at connection > time only. Of of the tricky parts is that all mail servers I know have > trouble with throttling. [...snip...] Traditional MTAs often respond by queuing and

Re: [mailop] A proposal for automated management of mail sending limits

2017-11-14 Thread Maarten Oelering
I agree with Ken that the need for guidelines is well intended. Many legitimate senders want to avoid pushing too hard and wasting resources on both ends. But I think exchanging specific limits between receiver and sender via a new mechanism is infeasible, and may not even be needed. Why not

Re: [mailop] A proposal for automated management of mail sending limits

2017-11-14 Thread David Hofstee
Hi Ken, I agree that it is a problem. I do think this could be done at connection time only. Of of the tricky parts is that all mail servers I know have trouble with throttling. They can throttle on a (set of) recipient domain(s), but not on a cluster of MXs from e.g. Microsoft. E.g. they put