Re: [mailop] Google unsolicited mail rejected with 421

2024-03-14 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 12:17:39PM +0100, Slavko via mailop wrote: > D??a 14. 3. o 12:03 Marco Moock via mailop napísal(a): > > > Is there any standard that defines the retry rates or at least a best > > practise? > > RFC 5321, sect. 4.5.4.1: > > In general, the retry interval SHOULD be at

Re: [mailop] Google unsolicited mail rejected with 421

2024-03-14 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 12:03:46PM +0100, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: > Am 14.03.2024 schrieb Julian Bradfield via mailop : > > > On 2024-03-14, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: > > > sendmail tried to deliver it 20 times during the night - this > > > morning I deleted the mail from mqueue. > >

Re: [mailop] Ubuntu Noble/24.04 - TLS 1.0, 1.1 and DTLS 1.0 are forcefully disabled

2024-03-13 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 05:24:37PM +0100, Marco Moock wrote: > Am 13.03.2024 um 17:06:03 Uhr schrieb Johann Klasek via mailop: > > > Is it not condescending to question to reason why someone has not > > already the opportunity to switch to TLS 1.2? > > Can you name som

Re: [mailop] Ubuntu Noble/24.04 - TLS 1.0, 1.1 and DTLS 1.0 are forcefully disabled

2024-03-13 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 12:45:08PM +, Michael Irvine via mailop wrote: > I'm in agreement. I don't see an issue. All the largest providers are > minimum TLS. 1.2. We have had many years to migrate. The internet does not consist just out of the "largest provider". Is it not condescending to

Re: [mailop] Recommended ciphers used for ESMTP connections

2024-03-04 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 09:30:25PM +, Slavko via mailop wrote: > D??a 4. marca 2024 21:15:23 UTC používate?? John Levine via mailop > napísal: [..] > >Agreed. My MTA uses "NORMAL:-VERS-SSL3.0" > > Then why you are disabled SSL3? And why you do not build own openssl > with SSL2 support?

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] outlook.com 421 try again later S77719

2023-10-11 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
Hi Michael! On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 06:07:13PM +, Michael Wise via mailop wrote: > > That's volume throttling, not IP blocking. > Did you recently bring a new block online, or ... someone sending out an > abnormally large volume of mail? > If it's going out thru shared IPs, that could also

Re: [mailop] Increase of SSL/TLS errors

2023-09-12 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:25:54AM +0200, Camille - Clean Mailbox via mailop wrote: > Hi, > > I didn't changed anything in Postfix configuration. But yes, over the last > months, we upgraded from Debian 11 (OpenSSL 1.1.1n) to Debian 12 (OpenSSL > 3.0.9). > I don't see anything in openssl.cnf

Re: [mailop] Any old-school sendmail types here good with the m4?

2023-08-23 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 01:08:36PM +0300, Lena--- via mailop wrote: > > I don't know where > > to buy the brand of LSD that they did at UC Berkeley when they wrote this, > > in order to make m4 make sense. > > They chose incomprehensible m4 in order to coerce you to buy support from > them.

Re: [mailop] two openssl (in OpenDKIM) questions for the masses

2022-09-20 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 02:44:50PM -0700, Dan Mahoney (Gushi) via mailop wrote: [..] > Thus the questions: > > * Does anyone know of an OS packager that's choosing to build with gnutls > instead of openssl. (It would simplify autoconf a lot to remove the > gnutls support, as there are AC

Re: [mailop] gmail changes today?

2022-06-09 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 10:12:01AM -0700, Brandon Long via mailop wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 10:07 AM Brandon Long wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 7:47 AM Otto J. Makela wrote: [..] > >> I know of a couple of similar cases -- to me it seems Google's Bayesian > >> heuristic (if there is

[mailop] Microsoft site with bad SPF record

2021-10-28 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
Has anyone else seen this from Microsoft sites? Recently, I stumbled over a rejection in our logs that came from a Microsoft site with the source mta48.email.microsoftemail.com [13.111.32.222]. The SPF entry of the from domain contains an "all" which includes the entire Internet as permitted

Re: [mailop] protection.outlook.com refusing to accept mail with misleading temp error message

2021-06-01 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 02:48:23PM -0400, John Levine via mailop wrote: > It appears that Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop said: > >Glad to hear that they could help you but I'm of the stubborn kind - we're > >not doing anything wrong, we're not spamming, > >we're not in a spammy neighborhood

Re: [mailop] Anyone using clustered DoveCot?

2021-01-25 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 10:36:36PM +, Tom Perrine via mailop wrote: > I???d be interested in chatting with anyone who has rolled out (or failed to > rollout!) Dovecot in a cluster. Especially if you???re using an object store. It might not fit into this category but we are using for a

Re: [mailop] What's the point of secondary MX servers?

2020-12-18 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:58:05PM -0500, John Levine via mailop wrote: > In article <469F9E736EE5DB4A8C04A6F7527268FA01CA03E20B@MACNT35.macro.local> > you write: > >Where we have multiple internet connections, we setup MX records for both > >connections. If one connection is down, > >email

Re: [mailop] Deutsche Telekom rejects connections because of missing "provider identification"

2020-08-27 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 09:21:20AM +0200, Felix Zielcke via mailop wrote: [..] > Deutsche Telekom uses a whitelist which IPs can send mails to @t- > online.de accounts. They block every IP by default. > > So if you got some cloud vm with a new IP address, which never before > sent mail to a

Re: [mailop] Is DNS-over-HTTPS bad? Sure.

2020-07-06 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 07:10:11AM -0700, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote: > One thing not mentioned so far in this thread, is data collection.. > > While many D'oh providers claim NOT to log or track, simply by using > HTTPS opens up the door to exposing personal browsing habits.. > > It is

Re: [mailop] AT Block - abuse_...@abuse-att.net still valid?

2020-02-12 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:25:39AM +, Laura Atkins wrote: > > > On 12 Feb 2020, at 11:15, Johann Klasek via mailop > > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:03:52AM +, Laura Atkins via mailop wrote: > >>> On 11 Feb 2020, at 17:01

Re: [mailop] AT Block - abuse_...@abuse-att.net still valid?

2020-02-12 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:03:52AM +, Laura Atkins via mailop wrote: > > On 11 Feb 2020, at 17:01, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: [..] > > Your statement is certainly valid, and I don't mean to sound whiny. But it > > is also frustrating when providers (usually large providers, like AT) >

Re: [mailop] Messages from small personal SMTP server being marked as junk by Google

2020-01-25 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 03:11:58PM -0800, Brandon Long via mailop wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 1:27 PM Gregory Heytings via mailop < > > > sender in addressbook is definitely a whitelisting signal, as is > > > replying to a message the user sent or on the same thread. They used to > > > be

Re: [mailop] suddenly sendmail cannot make tls connections

2020-01-25 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
Hi John, fine that this is solved in some way. On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 09:07:51PM -0500, John Covici via mailop wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:30:36 -0500, > John Covici via mailop wrote: [..] > > I first want to thank everyone who has been helping me on this > > problem. Well, I found

Re: [mailop] suddenly sendmail cannot make tls connections

2020-01-24 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 01:07:30PM -0500, Bill Cole via mailop wrote: > On 24 Jan 2020, at 12:09, John Covici via mailop wrote: [..] >>> On 23 Jan 2020, at 18:01, John Covici via mailop wrote: Hi. I am using sendmail from my own server and using a virtual machine in the cloud as a

Re: [mailop] suddenly sendmail cannot make tls connections

2020-01-24 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 07:00:04AM -0500, John Covici via mailop wrote: > Thanks a lot for responding. > hmmm, I put the cipherlists you mentioned in my access database using > tls_clt_features CipherList= ... and I even put tls_server_features Better put it in the configuration file, .mc/.cf. >

Re: [mailop] Messages from small personal SMTP server being marked as junk by Google

2020-01-24 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 09:37:56AM +, Paul Smith via mailop wrote: > On 24/01/2020 03:24, John Gateley via mailop wrote: >> >> She recently sent email to a group of students for a class she is >> teaching, she had >> e-mailed none of them before. Most of them had gmail addresses, and >>

Re: [mailop] Messages from small personal SMTP server being marked as junk by Google

2020-01-24 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 10:59:53AM +, Gregory Heytings via mailop wrote: [..] > That's your opinion. My opinion is that "-all" is almost never a good > idea, and is certainly not a good idea for a small personal server. It > breaks forwards and mailing lists. "?all" does not mean "we're

Re: [mailop] Best Re-engagement Email

2019-09-19 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 09:15:18AM -0400, Tom Kulzer via mailop wrote: > > On Sep 18, 2019, at 10:24 PM, Jay Hennigan via mailop > > wrote: > > > > "If you want to continue to receive email from us, click here or reply to > > this email leaving the subject unchanged." > > Vacation

Re: [mailop] Admin: Gmail users of mailop suspended due to bounces.

2019-05-02 Thread Johann Klasek via mailop
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 09:08:34AM +0200, Thomas Walter via mailop wrote: [..] > We have a lot of students forwarding their emails to external mailboxes > (usually freemailers even though they have more options here). Same problem here... and it was very annoying and support consuming. [..] > I