[MLton] Google is rejected mail to [email protected]

See below.  I do not have this problem with any other Google-managed
domains, so maybe something is wrong with the mlton.org setup.  My
mail server IP address has a clean bill of health, and it's not
located in a residential IP range.

Unfortunately, senders cannot contact Google support, otherwise I
would have done that.

From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[email protected]>
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 17:39:57 +0000
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Enyo-Status: sender=74.125.82.67 asn= hflags= mflags=

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

     [email protected]

Technical details of permanent failure: 
Message rejected by Google Groups. Please visit http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=188131 to review our Bulk Email Senders Guidelines.

----- Original message -----

X-Received: by 10.180.221.72 with SMTP id qc8mr8347591wic.19.1418233197675;
        Wed, 10 Dec 2014 09:39:57 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from albireo.enyo.de (albireo.enyo.de. [46.237.207.196])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fw6si8577620wjb.140.2014.12.10.09.39.57
        for <[email protected]>
        (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Wed, 10 Dec 2014 09:39:57 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: none (google.com: [email protected] does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=46.237.207.196;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
       spf=none (google.com: [email protected] does not designate permitted sender hosts) [email protected]
Received: from [172.17.203.2] (helo=deneb.enyo.de)
	by albireo.enyo.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
	id 1XylEy-00031S-8p
	for [email protected]; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 18:39:56 +0100
Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.80)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1XylEy-000354-2F
	for [email protected]; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 18:39:56 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [MLton] cost of _export
References: <[email protected]>
	<CAMrhFL4PMe85FvhBdO_DFROA1MnmUgQuawerVn1ooDEV6_fLfg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMrhFL763nRZm=HPJzn87jqz_6Fwg5aS-9oTNUXPMs5vFmPiYQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAMrhFL75VAt=nyMAnRFEQn_3MtV7L_eTTHYuErWVDOS-fow7=g@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 18:39:56 +0100
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> (Bernard Berthomieu's message of "Mon,
	08 Dec 2014 22:42:56 +0100")
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

* Bernard Berthomieu:

> For the record, the actual SML application is an xml parser
> relying on libexpat (in C) but with start/end element handlers
> implemented in SML. So it exactly fits the "SML calling C
> calling SML" scenario the patch improves.

I have a toy implementation which uses C callbacks to serialize the
events to a buffer on the C heap.  No C-to-SML callbacks are needed as
a result, and there is only one SML-to-C-and-back transition per input
buffer (4 KiB or so).

Interested?  I could publish the sources as-is if you want to play
with it.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=164703151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk