Tim Tisdall added the comment:
Here's some headers from a recent email sent to me:
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 2a01:4f8:131:2480::3 is neither permitted
nor denied by best guess record for domain of
roundup-ad...@psf.upfronthosting.co.za) client-ip=2a01:4f8:131:2480::3;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
spf=neutral (google.com: 2a01:4f8:131:2480::3 is neither permitted nor
denied by best guess record for domain of
roundup-ad...@psf.upfronthosting.co.za)
smtp.mailfrom=roundup-ad...@psf.upfronthosting.co.za;
dmarc=fail (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=python.org
As you can see, "dmarc=fail". (though, I can't seem to see a DMARC policy on
any of the pertinent dns records)
Another email from the tracker that was in my spam box said:
"Why is this message in Spam? It's in violation of Google's recommended email
sender guidelines." And linked to
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126?hl=en-GB#authentication
A DMARC policy should really be added and DKIM signing should also be added.
Lately, major email providers have been clamping down to try to prevent spam by
nearly requiring those things.
----------
nosy: +Tim.Tisdall
_______________________________________________________
PSF Meta Tracker <metatrac...@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
<http://psf.upfronthosting.co.za/roundup/meta/issue562>
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Tracker-discuss mailing list
Tracker-discuss@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tracker-discuss
