Re: SPF problems too

On 01/15/2016 08:07 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
> Sure if I had sent it to an address that's not advertised rather than the one
> that was on the LA web site it might have worked better.  But really it should
> just work.

Ah, you see, I thought you would have read the error message that was 
returned, which specifies the email address 
"[email protected]" was the final destination.

>
> I haven't had good success with that.  On the 12th of January 2015 I had an
> email I sent to [email protected] bounce from your address because
> your server does SPF checks and at that time rejected mail that had gone
> through the LA server.

It's interesting you say this, as the admin.linux.org.au server isn't 
configured to do SPF checks.


> On at least two occasions I've sent mail to LA council members because the
> list didn't like them and asked if they could raise the issue of the LA list
> not accepting SPF protected mail.

Feel free to include my email address in future issue reports. Despite 
how it might appear, we are actually trying to fix things that are 
broken, but if we don't know people are experiencing issues, we're 
missing a crucial piece of the puzzle.

>
> As an aside our discussion in January 2015 was sparked by me experimenting
> with DMARC and causing a bunch of people to be forcibly unsubscribed from this
> mailing list when hotmail and maybe some other servers rejected the messages.
>

yes, I remember the issue well.