I think sometimes these "too big to fail" mail service providers block IPs
just because they can. Who are your users going to believe? It has to be
something you the small time email service provider is doing wrong, it
can't possibly be good ol "insert big brand here".
I certainly understand
Hello.
We are attempting to ramp up volume on new IPs and seeing issues with
Bigpond with the following logs:
smtp;452 4.4.2 ...@... Max messages per session. IB117 4.4.2
i{37c6f83b-6944-4cb1-be5b-34bf0d80c6cc}
Anyone from the Bigpond team could help increase the mailing threshold?
Best
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, pgnd via mailop wrote:
Is that domain the same as you post here from? I ask, because your
email was signed only by one key and you mentioned dualsign previously.
nope. _this_ is not sent from one of my own servers.
all my mails from all my servers are dual signed.
as
This happens every 3 months now:
2023-10-29T19:22:20.569+00:00 1qxBMV-0086ua-AC ** @hotmail.com
P= R=dnslookup_ipv4 T=remote_smtp
H=hotmail-com.olc.protection.outlook.com [104.47.58.161]:25
I=[209.16.157.42]:40134
X=TLS1.2:ECDHE_SECP384R1__RSA_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256
Dňa 29. októbra 2023 18:40:37 UTC používateľ pgnd via mailop
napísal:
>in each case, the same "dkim=neutral (no key) header.i=..." anomaly is
>presence in headers
I cannot tell what gmail's "no key" means, but in our country it means,
that key cannot be fetched/parsed for some reason. AFAIK
On Oct 28, 2023, at 9:27 AM, pgnd via mailop wrote:
>
> again, this is _assuming_ that that anomalous 'dkim=neutral (no key)' report
> *is* what's causing the misclassification as SPAM in gmail ... which i can't
> (dis)prove yet.
When you view a message in the Gmail spam folder, it has a
