On 2/16/23 1:47 PM, Benny Pedersen via mailop wrote:
please dont suggest this
I agree that these ... questionable ... solutions are sub-optimal.
However I fully agree that each email server operator is free to run
their own email server as they see fit (or allowed to do by management).
I
On 2023-02-17 05:02:32 (+0800), Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop wrote:
Am 16.02.23 um 17:57 schrieb Tom Perrine via mailop:
The subject says it all.
We’ve got users (who doesn’t?) who fat-finger gmail.com to
gmail.co – apparently A LOT.
The domain gmail.co seems to be an anti-squat domain,
Ugh, looks like when I added our NULL MX records in 2016, it was only for
our other domains that don't receive email, not for the odd gmail typos
that have special web handling redirections.
I'll file a ticket.
Brandon
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 11:06 AM Matthew Pounsett via mailop <
Same. In fact, if anyone wants it, I regularly update a list which is
mostly intended to help out my customers that receive a lot of fake
email signups on blogs, forums, etc. Feel free to take from it:
https://github.com/mxroute/da_server_updates/blob/master/exim/spam_recipients
On 2023-02-16
Am 16.02.23 um 17:57 schrieb Tom Perrine via mailop:
The subject says it all.
We’ve got users (who doesn’t?) who fat-finger gmail.com to gmail.co –
apparently A LOT.
The domain gmail.co seems to be an anti-squat domain, and on HTTP it throws a 404 – as expected. (Although they could
have
Alex Irimia via mailop skrev den 2023-02-16 21:05:
If your MTA allows you to, maybe you could overwrite gmail.co [2] to
gmail.com [1] and actually reach the intended recipient of the
fat-fingered sender?
small fingers can do errors aswell
please dont suggest this
If your MTA allows you to, maybe you could overwrite gmail.co to gmail.com
and actually reach the intended recipient of the fat-fingered sender?
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 7:00 PM Tom Perrine via mailop
wrote:
> The subject says it all.
>
>
>
> We’ve got users (who doesn’t?) who fat-finger
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 2:21 PM Tom Perrine
wrote:
> Perfect, thanks!
>
> I bet they have an entire slew of those sorts of domains.
>
>
>
> I guess I’m not the only person who thinks it’s a good idea and I’m not a
> complete moron today (as opposed to other days!)
>
Null MX records are one of
Tom Perrine via mailop skrev den 2023-02-16 20:21:
Perfect, thanks!
I bet they have an entire slew of those sorts of domains.
I guess I’m not the only person who thinks it’s a good idea and
I’m not a complete moron today (as opposed to other days!)
Matthew Pounsett via mailop skrev den 2023-02-16 20:03:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:03 PM Tom Perrine via mailop
wrote:
Any idea who/how to suggest to Google that a null MX would be
appreciated?
I spoke to someone who may be able to get it done at the DNS-OARC
workshop, which is going on
Perfect, thanks!
I bet they have an entire slew of those sorts of domains.
I guess I’m not the only person who thinks it’s a good idea and I’m not a
complete moron today (as opposed to other days!)
Regards,
Tom
From: Matthew Pounsett
Date: Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 11:04 AM
To: Tom
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:03 PM Tom Perrine via mailop
wrote:
>
>
> Any idea who/how to suggest to Google that a null MX would be appreciated?
>
I spoke to someone who may be able to get it done at the DNS-OARC workshop,
which is going on today. They're going to look into it. But it's one of
The subject says it all.
We’ve got users (who doesn’t?) who fat-finger gmail.com to gmail.co –
apparently A LOT.
The domain gmail.co seems to be an anti-squat domain, and on HTTP it throws a
404 – as expected. (Although they could have redirected to gmail.com –
whatever).
But, there’s no MX,
13 matches
Mail list logo
