Hi Rui,
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:36:34 +0100 Rui Ribeiro wrote:
> There were even customized ports of Qmail in the past that had
> options that could be easily be enabled to downright refuse email
> from emails hosts not matching A/PTR or HELO
Postfix has these types of filters built in by
Rui Ribeiro writes:
> There were even customized ports of Qmail in the past that had options
> that could be easily be enabled to downright refuse email from emails
> hosts not matching A/PTR or HELO...not exactly good citizenship
Well it's like anything else, a couple
There were even customized ports of Qmail in the past that had options that
could be easily be enabled to downright refuse email from emails hosts not
matching A/PTR or HELO...not exactly good citizenship
Cheers
On 11 August 2017 at 10:49, Craig Skinner wrote:
> On
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 17:18:45 Stuart Henderson wrote:
> You can't expect to reliably deliver email unless you have a PTR
> record and an A/ record (at least within the same domain, though
> in some cases the full hostname needs to match).
Yes - matching DNS PTR/A records, and HELO hostname
On 2017-08-10, Rui Ribeiro wrote:
> An email server in a residential setting will fail PTR unless you are
> working with a medium sized/an ISP that cares about their customers.
>
> see answer here
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/371329/bind-proper-reverse-config
An email server in a residential setting will fail PTR unless you are
working with a medium sized/an ISP that cares about their customers.
see answer here
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/371329/bind-proper-reverse-config
On 9 August 2017 at 23:34, Rupert Gallagher
The dns still fails RFC1912 (ptr).
Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Walter Alejandro Iglesias
wrote:
> Hello Rupert, In article you wrote: >
> https://www.dnsinspect.com/roquesor.com/10171765 Try the link again. The
> reason it showed false
Hello Rupert,
In article
Your ISP must delete ip from sorbs.net,..:
http://www.dnsbl.info/dnsbl-database-check.php
Krzysztof Strzeszewski
W dniu 06.08.2017 o 16:51, Walter Alejandro Iglesias pisze:
Hello everyone,
I was using smtpd(8) (static IP and FQDN resolving direct and reverse)
for a year without problems.
With all due respect, there's a legit question here - it's not just
"philosophical crap".
I believe people have already suggested ensuring DNS (including SPF records
etc) is properly setup too.
---
“Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
everyone. That’s worth going
We reject tons of junk from static ISP-branded IPs with a broken or absent DNS.
If one wants to serve their own email from their static IP, they should have
the decency to serve their own authoritative DNS, instead of blaming the ISP or
writing philosophical crap on mailing lists.
Sent from
I would advise not assuming the email ISP will forward blindly all the
email it gets.
Back then years ago I ran an ISP, and the most strange ever support call I
get was a competitor buying a modem of ours, and escalating a support call
our email server was not forwarding *their* email.
C: Well,
I understand that given everyone uses gmail, hotmail or mail provided by
some multinational hosting service they assume mail coming from
residential connections cannot be other thing but spam sent from hacked
machines. But someone paying for a static IP in a residential
connection is the opposite
My suggestion to resolve the whole issue: forward mail through your ISP's
mailserver or go and buy a cheap VPS.
Amazon EC2 micro instances work fine for the purpose, and it is possible
with some hackery to install OpenBSD on them.
---
“Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers.
In article <20170808121343.46a8ddb9@fir.internal> you wrote:
> Hi Walter:
>
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 19:45:22 +0200 Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
> > What determines those "ranges", who regulates that?
>
> Some ISPs submit IP blocks to various blacklists. e.g:
>
Hi Walter:
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 19:45:22 +0200 Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
> What determines those "ranges", who regulates that?
Some ISPs submit IP blocks to various blacklists. e.g:
https://www.Spamhaus.Org/faq/section/Spamhaus%20PBL#242
http://www.Sorbs.Net/faq/dul.shtml
Asking your ISP
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 04:42:09PM -0500, Eric Johnson wrote:
> It can be very aggravating when an ISP still blocks port 25. With the
> great expansion of smart phones and people getting e-mail on them, it gets
> in the way far more than it helps. You can't expect every smart phone
> user to
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017, Jesper Wallin wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 05:29:04PM +0200, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
> Like Martijn pointed out, you're sending mail from a IP which is not
> intended for mail-servers. Most ISPs block outgoing traffic on port 25
> to prevent their customers
You're the last person anyone wants email advice from, Rupert.
khm
https://www.dnsinspect.com/roquesor.com/10171765
Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Walter Alejandro Iglesias
wrote:
> Hello everyone, I was using smtpd(8) (static IP and FQDN resolving direct and
> reverse) for a year without problems. Today
In article you wrote:
> On 2017-08-06, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
> > I visited spamhaus.org site and found out my IP is included in a list
> > called PBL that, as they explain is not a spammers list, it just
> > includes
On 2017-08-06, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
> I visited spamhaus.org site and found out my IP is included in a list
> called PBL that, as they explain is not a spammers list, it just
> includes dynamic and "non mail server IP ranges".
>
> Does someone here know what is
> On 6. Aug 2017, at 19:45, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
>
> Hi Niels,
>
>> On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 07:19:04PM +0200, Niels Kobschätzki wrote:
>>
On 6. Aug 2017, at 18:40, Walter Alejandro Iglesias
wrote:
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at
Hi Niels,
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 07:19:04PM +0200, Niels Kobschätzki wrote:
>
> > On 6. Aug 2017, at 18:40, Walter Alejandro Iglesias
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 06:02:25PM +0200, Jesper Wallin wrote:
> >> Like Martijn pointed out, you're sending mail from
> On 6. Aug 2017, at 18:40, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 06:02:25PM +0200, Jesper Wallin wrote:
>> Like Martijn pointed out, you're sending mail from a IP which is not
>> intended for mail-servers.
>
> This was my main question. What is an
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 06:02:25PM +0200, Jesper Wallin wrote:
> Like Martijn pointed out, you're sending mail from a IP which is not
> intended for mail-servers.
This was my main question. What is an "IP intended for mail-servers"?
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 05:29:04PM +0200, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
> Hi Gareth,
>
> On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 04:12:45PM +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote:
> > I'm assuming that you have your SPF records setup correctly.
> >
>
> I did that at first, and all the tricks (dkim, etc) they ask to
Hi Gareth,
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 04:12:45PM +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote:
> I'm assuming that you have your SPF records setup correctly.
>
I did that at first, and all the tricks (dkim, etc) they ask to make you
appear as a legal sender, but after confirming my mail still went to
SPAM in both
Hi Martijn,
On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 05:09:10PM +0200, Martijn van Duren wrote:
> Not an authority on this, so take my reply for what you want.
>
> As far as I know this list is used to keep track of ip-addresses by ISPs
> for home-addresses, which are not intended to be used for outgoing mail.
>
Sadly there's nothing you can do other than to contact spamhaus.org and see
if they'll remove your IP.
I'm assuming that you have your SPF records setup correctly.
On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Walter Alejandro Iglesias
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I was using smtpd(8)
Not an authority on this, so take my reply for what you want.
As far as I know this list is used to keep track of ip-addresses by ISPs
for home-addresses, which are not intended to be used for outgoing mail.
You can whitelist your ip-address on this list yourself and all should
be back to
31 matches
Mail list logo