From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Vasilii Kolobkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Google Gmail mailing list bounces Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2019 23:05:02 +0200 Message-ID: <87y366z05d.fsf@orangeshoelaces.net> References: <83d0nnit0o.fsf@gnu.org> <20190220115853855643126@bob.proulx.com> <83imxegskr.fsf@gnu.org> <20190220152455054511191@bob.proulx.com> <835ztdgr10.fsf@gnu.org> <20190221170259478078146@bob.proulx.com> <20190223124310117172532@bob.proulx.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="110429"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 23 22:55:18 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gxfGQ-000ScO-3j for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2019 22:55:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43036 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gxfGP-0005Ni-3N for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2019 16:55:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44944) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gxeU0-00037K-GY for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2019 16:05:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gxeTz-0005qR-EU for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2019 16:05:16 -0500 Original-Received: from orangeshoelaces.net ([71.19.146.160]:37073) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gxeTx-0005bI-Op for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2019 16:05:15 -0500 Original-Received: from orangeshoelaces.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by orangeshoelaces.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 90e4a5e1 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2019 13:05:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=orangeshoelaces.net; h= from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:content-type; s=mail; bh=BO313nx3UfN5vWvtocjKGdft9 oE=; b=yKuPmxzSBVqN3AxExbpOEsG7WBEnMlp++8AxptRtCv+2fw2/9t0Z8Yw+8 3X0ms47QYnDMVH5U5FqFqGENhN6UvH9mgtmnTf7Bmb0WH9WTTU6ybzG5ipncAiNs vD1xrRWWICBG6axF/ezhBPiXNxWTrmQgjWVSDQ3EM9h+1fvVu4= Original-Received: by orangeshoelaces.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id c698d3eb (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO) for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2019 13:05:34 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by refuseclack (Exim) for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2019 23:05:02 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20190223124310117172532@bob.proulx.com> (Bob Proulx's message of "Sat, 23 Feb 2019 12:56:11 -0700") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 71.19.146.160 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 23 Feb 2019 16:55:01 -0500 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:119524 Archived-At: Bob Proulx writes: > Nate Bass wrote: >> I compared my Gmail to the archives and I found that I wasn't >> receiving mail from one particular address moasenwood@zoho.eu and I >> think this caused me to bounce off the help-gnu-emacs mailing list. > > That is quite interesting. Mail from most members came through okay. > But mail from moasenwood@zoho.eu was frequently rejected by Gmail. I > don't see anything unusual about that zoho.eu (no DKIM for example) > that would cause any difficulty. This might have to do with the way this company having their own ideas of what constitutes legitimate mail. E.g. if the mta host doesn't have good repuptation with them, regardless of whether you are following all the good practices, you most likely will end up marked as spam. I thought it does apply to the envelope sender though, but it might as well be that they look into the original sender for ml correspondence.