On 27/06/2014 00:54, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Mark Rousell writes:
>
> > On 26/06/2014 09:22, Malcolm Austen wrote:
> > > (I note that neither yahoo.co.uk nor aol.co.uk have published a DMARC
> > > policy.)
> >
> > As a relevant aside, AOL in the UK was sold to TalkTalk a couple of
> >
Mark Rousell writes:
> On 26/06/2014 09:22, Malcolm Austen wrote:
> > (I note that neither yahoo.co.uk nor aol.co.uk have published a DMARC
> > policy.)
>
> As a relevant aside, AOL in the UK was sold to TalkTalk a couple of
> years ago so is independent of AOL in the USA.
yahoo.com says t
On 26/06/2014 09:22, Malcolm Austen wrote:
> (I note that neither yahoo.co.uk nor aol.co.uk have published a DMARC
> policy.)
As a relevant aside, AOL in the UK was sold to TalkTalk a couple of
years ago so is independent of AOL in the USA.
I note that the aol.co.uk domain is still owned by AOL I
On 06/26/2014 01:22 AM, Malcolm Austen wrote:
>
> Thanks Mark. For the time being I have removed AOL and Yahoo from that
> spam filter and marked all such addresses as 'moderated'. I'm guessing
> though that allowing them through would still escape the DMARC munging -
> so I've told the list that
On 06/25/2014 08:11 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
> I think for this reason DMARC checking should come before spam
> detection, or be done as part of SpamDetect rather than moderation.
> If dmarc_moderation_action is reject/discard, let's not waste any
> further CPU cycles or queue space, let a
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 09:50:51 +0100, Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
Malcolm Austen writes:
> I did (before I had 2.1.18-1 available) toy with setting it high (c.9
or
> 10) and setting bounce_info_stale_after down to 1 so that I could let
> aol/yahoo posts out in a burst on one day and then
Malcolm Austen writes:
> I did (before I had 2.1.18-1 available) toy with setting it high (c.9 or
> 10) and setting bounce_info_stale_after down to 1 so that I could let
> aol/yahoo posts out in a burst on one day and then hold them for a couple
> of days to clear the bounce scores.
Of
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 23:32:23 +0100, Mark Sapiro wrote:
On 06/25/2014 02:41 PM, Malcolm Austen wrote:
I won't call this a bug but I think it's an issue :-)
It is an issue. I too am not sure whether it is a bug, but I think we
need to do something about it. More below ...
Thanks Mark. For th
