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

2020-02-12 Thread Laura Atkins via mailop
> On 12 Feb 2020, at 16:47, Andrew C Aitchison via mailop > wrote: > Maybe other blacklists isn't a good indicator. But if the IP is not >> listed in Spamhaus, Spamcop, Sorbs, Proofpoint, Symantec (lately I'm >> having more issues with Symantec, so I'm not sure how reliable it is >> anymore),

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

2020-02-12 Thread Steve Atkins via mailop
On 12/02/2020 16:47, Andrew C Aitchison via mailop wrote: Does this fly, or am I missing something critical ? If you block for content or black-listed host and there is a DMARC reporting address report the appropriate details to the DMARC reporting address(es) ? OK, I haven't thought through

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

2020-02-12 Thread Andrew C Aitchison via mailop
On Wed, 12 Feb 2020, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: Look, I understand it's a thin line battling spam and abusive behavior from mail servers. I've pleaded with many blacklist operators to give me details as to why they are blacklisting one of our servers. I can probably count on 1 hand how

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

2020-02-12 Thread Bill Cole via mailop
On 12 Feb 2020, at 7:02, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote: Dnia 12.02.2020 o godz. 11:25:39 Laura Atkins via mailop pisze: Right, but the way around, for bad behavior one should have and provide data to prove it. Why? Isn't it obvious? If you are accusing someone of any behaviour, you

Re: [mailop] ADMIN: Mailop in 2020

2020-02-12 Thread Graeme Fowler via mailop
On 8 Feb 2020, at 21:45, Simon Lyall via mailop wrote: > Cutover is probably still a few weeks away. Step 1 has already happened: Andy Davidson, who originally registered the domain and has until now provided all the infrastructure for the domain and list, has handed the domain over to me. I

[mailop] Contact at netclient.no

2020-02-12 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt via mailop
Anybody got a contact at netclient.no? They're hiding behind a kafkaesque mail filtering system - and then recommend registering at http://www.blocklist.eu/ which is impossible without a Norwegian "Organisasjonsnummer" :( -- Ralf Hildebrandt Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin

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

2020-02-12 Thread Scott Mutter via mailop
* On Wed, Feb 12 5:03AM Laura Atkins said : > > > On 11 Feb 2020, at 17:01, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: > > > > Well... I guess my thought is, if it takes them a week to weed through all > > of their requests... maybe there's a better way to optimize this? Or maybe > > they need more

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

2020-02-12 Thread Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop
Dnia 12.02.2020 o godz. 11:25:39 Laura Atkins via mailop pisze: > > Right, but the way around, for bad behavior one should have and provide > > data to prove it. > > > Why? Isn't it obvious? If you are accusing someone of any behaviour, you should have at least some evidence to back up your

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, Scott Mutter via mailop > >>> wrote: > > [..] >

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

2020-02-12 Thread Laura Atkins via mailop
> 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, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: > [..] >>> Your statement is certainly valid, and I don't mean to sound whiny. But 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 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] AT Block - abuse_...@abuse-att.net still valid?

2020-02-12 Thread Laura Atkins via mailop
> On 11 Feb 2020, at 17:01, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: > > Well... I guess my thought is, if it takes them a week to weed through all of > their requests... maybe there's a better way to optimize this? Or maybe they > need more personnel manning these positions? > > Your statement is