similar to: DMARC test

On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:27 AM, gene.cumm at yahoo.com <gene.cumm at yahoo.com> wrote: > Test from Yahoo via Android > > --Gene > _______________________________________________ > Syslinux mailing list > Submissions to Syslinux at zytor.com > Unsubscribe or set options at: > http://www.zytor.com/mailman/listinfo/syslinux As some users may already be aware, my test

On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 12:14:51PM -0500, Gene Cumm wrote: > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:27 AM, gene.cumm at yahoo.com <gene.cumm at yahoo.com> wrote: > > Test from Yahoo via Android > > > > --Gene > > _______________________________________________ > > Syslinux mailing list > > Submissions to Syslinux at zytor.com > > Unsubscribe or set options at:

> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 1:48 AM, Geert Stappers <stappers at stappers.nl> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 07:37:44PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 12:14:51PM -0500, Gene Cumm wrote: >?????????? <snip/> > > > As far as I can tell, GMail does process the SPF/DKIM/DMARC properties > > > but ignores

Maybe this[1] page, option 3.C. That strikes me as attractive, if only the mailing-list software can easily support it. (Or be hacked to support it; I'm willing to try.) Or, the "From" could be the mailing-list, the "Reply-To" could be the author, then the "CC" could be the mailing-list plus original "CC" addresses. If someone hits the

> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 9:34 AM, Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Saturday, January 17, 2015 1:48 AM, Geert Stappers <stappers at stappers.nl> wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 07:37:44PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 12:14:51PM -0500, Gene Cumm wrote: > > <snip/>

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 01:20:58PM -0500, Gene Cumm wrote: > On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Patrick Masotta wrote: > > On Sat, 2015-01-17 Geert Stappers wrote: > > > If 1 person with a yahoo.com e-mail adres does reply on this > > > message, then we have test result for the setting that was changed > > > wednesday. > > > > test > > Patrick,

>If 1 person with a yahoo.com e-mail adres does reply on this > message, > then we have test result for the setting that was changed > wednesday. test

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Patrick Masotta <masottaus at yahoo.com> wrote: > >If 1 person with a yahoo.com e-mail adres does reply on this >> message, >> then we have test result for the setting that was changed >> wednesday. > > test Patrick, Due to Yahoo!'s DMARC, you probably didn't see the other two tests I already sent as I didn't see

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 12:53 PM, John 'Warthog9' Hawley <warthog19 at eaglescrag.net> wrote: > On 01/03/2015 08:56 AM, Gene Cumm wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Geert Stappers <stappers at stappers.nl> wrote: >>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 05:07:04PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: >>>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 11:06:58AM +0200, Ady wrote:

On 01/03/2015 08:56 AM, Gene Cumm wrote: > On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Geert Stappers <stappers at stappers.nl> wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 05:07:04PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: >>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 11:06:58AM +0200, Ady wrote: >>>>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 12:21:32PM -0800, Patrick Masotta wrote: >>>>>> [ ... Failed to

( previous thread at http://www.syslinux.org/archives/2015-January/023050.html ) > > <info from="web interface mailman" extra_from="backend mailinglist software"> > dmarc_moderation_action Option > dmarc_moderation_action (privacy): Action to take when anyone posts > to the list from a domain with a DMARC Reject/Quarantine Policy. > >

On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 07:37:44PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 12:14:51PM -0500, Gene Cumm wrote: <snip/> > > As far as I can tell, GMail does process the SPF/DKIM/DMARC properties > > but ignores Yahoo!'s DMARC policy to reject on failure. > > The Syslinux ML should now be ready for DMARC p=reject > > We shall see how

Hello Together Please i have new following Error, from DMARC Report, if i check my domain on example mxtoolbox i dont see any problems. Any from you know this Eror report, what i need to do to fix this issue? C:\folder>nslookup 94.237.32.243 Server: dns204.data.ch Address: 211.232.23.124 Name: wursti.dovecot.fi Address: 94.237.32.243

> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 12:21:32PM -0800, Patrick Masotta wrote: > > sudo apt-get install build-essential > > sudo apt-get build-dep gcc-multilib > > sudo apt-get install gcc-multilib > > > > sudo apt-get install nasm > > sudo apt-get install uuid-dev > > > > I run > > #make spotless > > #make > > > > but it

In the same vein, I am receiving forensic DMARC reports from mx01.nausch.org. Whenever I send a message to the mailing list or when my server sends a DMARC report, I'm getting a DMARC Forensic report. It's odd, because the actual report tells me both DKIM and SPF (in the the of a DMARC report) pass... Here is what I am getting : This is an authentication failure report for an email

On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 7:13 AM, Geert Stappers <stappers at stappers.nl> wrote: > > Happy New Year! > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 05:29:29PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 09:34:57AM -0500, Michael Sumulong wrote: >> > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Gene Cumm wrote: >> > > >> > > 1) patch to not call git when

Happy New Year! On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 05:29:29PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 09:34:57AM -0500, Michael Sumulong wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Gene Cumm wrote: > > > > > > 1) patch to not call git when not present has been prepared for after > > > 6.03 along with multiple other patches. > > > > 1) Sorry I

Hi guys, when I send e-mails to CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>, I received DMARC / DKIM failure reports. Is it possible to solve this problem and if so how? This is the first report: This is an email abuse report for an email message received from IP 208.100.23.70 on Tue, 17 Sep 2019 15:56:25 +0200. The message below did not meet the sending domain's DMARC policy. For

On 09/02/2019 10:44, Aki Tuomi via dovecot wrote: > For some reason mailman failed to "munge from" for senders with dmarc policy ;( > > It's now configured to always munge to avoid this again. I'd say, let Mailman throw all people off the list that have enabled DMARC checking without using exceptions for the lists they are on. It's a known fact that DMARC does not

>I wonder (please forgive my ignorance), whether there would be any >change/improvement if the "Reply-To:" and "CC:" fields would be >interchanged (back) from the current behavior (since March 2014 or so, >http://www.syslinux.org/archives/2014-March/021895.html ). Perhaps >Hotmail (and family) would accept these (Yahoo-originated) messages >then? AFAIK if the