On 2022-10-19 07:43, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 17Oct2022 21:19, Tim Chase wrote:
> >I found that I had to both set my SPF for the sending-server (in
> >my case, my VPS is the sender, rather than outsourcing to a smart-host
> >elsewhere),
>
> I tried that for us, but some places reject email
On 17Oct2022 21:19, Tim Chase wrote:
I found that I had to both set my SPF for the sending-server (in
my case, my VPS is the sender, rather than outsourcing to a smart-host
elsewhere),
I tried that for us, but some places reject email from our cloud server,
which is an AWS VM. So the home
On 2022-10-18 08:07, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 17Oct2022 09:48, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> >As more and more of my mails, also to friends could not reach them
> >@google.com, I studied the DNS record for SPF a bit and came up with
> >this single line in my DNS:
> >
> >@ TXT v=spf1
On 17Oct2022 09:48, Matthias Apitz wrote:
El día sábado, marzo 12, 2022 a las 11:12:49a. m. +, Claus Assmann escribió:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, Stefan Hagen wrote:
> > > 550-5.7.26 This message does not have authentication
> > > information or fails to
> Authenticated in this
El día sábado, marzo 12, 2022 a las 11:12:49a. m. +, Claus Assmann escribió:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, Stefan Hagen wrote:
>
> > > > 550-5.7.26 This message does not have authentication information or
> > > > fails to
>
> > Authenticated in this context means, you don't have SPF / DKIM /
On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 09:03:37AM +0100, Matthias Apitz
wrote:
> El día viernes, marzo 11, 2022 a las 03:12:41p. m. +0100, Stefan Hagen
> escribió:
>
> > > I've been seeing a lot of that lately. Google seem to have tightened
> > > their email security practice recently.
> > >
> > > It
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 11:55:04PM +, Ken Moffat
wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 09:10:01AM +1100, raf wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 03:12:41PM +0100, Stefan Hagen
> > wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > > 550-5.7.26 This message does not have authentication
> > > > > information or
> PS: maybe there is an option in gmail for users to whitelist senders
> from whom they want to receive mail?
Yes, sort of. There is no absolute whitelist, but there are two
things a gmail user can do to make it much less likely that mail
from a particular sender is marked as spam.
1. Have that
On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 12:09:01PM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día sábado, marzo 12, 2022 a las 10:05:35 +0100, Joerg Dorchain
> escribió:
>
> > Let's go through that:
> >
> > - An SPF-entry has to be created in the unixarea.de domain, I would assume
> > you can do that via the
> >
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, Stefan Hagen wrote:
> > > 550-5.7.26 This message does not have authentication information or
> > > fails to
> Authenticated in this context means, you don't have SPF / DKIM / DMARC set up.
[more off-topic/rant]
Isn't it nice how Google et.al. enforce things which are
El día sábado, marzo 12, 2022 a las 10:05:35 +0100, Joerg Dorchain escribió:
> Let's go through that:
>
> - An SPF-entry has to be created in the unixarea.de domain, I would assume
> you can do that via the
> interface of 1blu.de
>
> - DKIM-headers can be inserted locally. If you do that
On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 09:03:37AM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
>
> > > I've been seeing a lot of that lately. Google seem to have tightened
> > > their email security practice recently.
> > >
> > > It appears that 1blu is doing something that GMail doesn't like. They
> > > probably have a
El día viernes, marzo 11, 2022 a las 03:12:41p. m. +0100, Stefan Hagen escribió:
> > I've been seeing a lot of that lately. Google seem to have tightened
> > their email security practice recently.
> >
> > It appears that 1blu is doing something that GMail doesn't like. They
> > probably have
On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 09:10:01AM +1100, raf wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 03:12:41PM +0100, Stefan Hagen
> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > > 550-5.7.26 This message does not have authentication
> > > > information or fails to 550-5.7.26 pass authentication
> > > > checks. To best protect
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 03:12:41PM +0100, Stefan Hagen
wrote:
> Mark H. Wood wrote (2022-03-11 14:40 CET):
> > On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 11:43:53AM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > > I know, it's not the fault of our beloved mutt, but maybe someone is or
> > > was in the same problem and knows a
Mark H. Wood wrote (2022-03-11 14:40 CET):
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 11:43:53AM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > I know, it's not the fault of our beloved mutt, but maybe someone is or
> > was in the same problem and knows a solution...
> >
> > We (my family) are member of a fisherman association
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 11:43:53AM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> I know, it's not the fault of our beloved mutt, but maybe someone is or
> was in the same problem and knows a solution...
>
> We (my family) are member of a fisherman association and I have to send
> mails to one of the head
Dear Matthias,
Matthias Apitz writes:
> [...thanks...]
> We (my family) are member of a fisherman association and I have to send
> mails to one of the head members in charge for youth training. He has a
> Google mail account as and any mail gets rejected by
> Google with the response below.
>
Hello,
I know, it's not the fault of our beloved mutt, but maybe someone is or
was in the same problem and knows a solution...
We (my family) are member of a fisherman association and I have to send
mails to one of the head members in charge for youth training. He has a
Google mail account as
19 matches
Mail list logo
