[Mailman-Users] Mailman postings deferred by Yahoo

[Attila Kinali]

今晩は

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:11:04 +0900
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:

> Attila Kinali writes:
> 
>  > On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 05:15:58 -0600
>  > "Rick Harris" <rick at learntime.com> wrote:
>  > 
>  > 
>  > > whateveraddress at yahoo.com R=lookuphost T=remote_smtp defer (0): SMTP error
>  > > from remote mail server after initial connection: host g.mx.mail.yahoo.com
>  > > [206.190.53.191]: 421 4.7.0 [TS02] Messages from 216.104.33.122 temporarily
>  > > deferred due to user complaints - 4.16.56.1; see
>  > > http://postmaster.yahoo.com/421-ts02.html
>  > 
>  > Same here, although i get a TS01 instead of a TS02. And 10'000 a day of those.
> 
> This is just selective greylisting, which lots of sites use as a
> blanket policy.

It's definitly not greylisting. Our server sends out a few dozen mails
a day on the low traffic lists to a few hundred on the high traffic ones.
Any greylisting that is half way sanely implemented should know after
the second mail that the server is a legitimate sender.

I don't know what they actually use to base their decission on, but
what ever it is, it's not one of the standard ways.

> A look at
> 
>     http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/mail/postmaster/postmaster-15.html

I've read that already and i comply with all but the Can-spam thingy
(no idea what that is) and the Domain-Keys (too lazy to set them up).
Heck, even all HTML is removed from the mails going over the lists.

> suggests that Yahoo doesn't have a clue about discussion lists.  They
> seem to think that all mailing lists are announcement lists (of course
> that's apparently the OP's case).  Consider this list:

I'd rather say they have no clue at all. 
>From a mail i got from them, after i send them 6 times in a row
the logs they requested as attachment _and_ said that i'm attaching
it in the mail itself:

---
From: Yahoo! Mail <abuse-admin(AT)cc.yahoo-inc.com>
[...]
Unfortunately, your message was sent to us as an attachment or html 
document.  

Due to security purposes, our custom messaging system is unable to 
access attachments or webpages and we will need you to cut and paste 
plain text information, as opposed to html format or sending it as an 
attachment. We apologize for the inconvenience.
---

I really wonder if anyone is reading the mails at yahoo or
whether they just use a bot that sends back an canned answer based
on some key words. Otherwise someone would have noticed that
the logs i mentioned as being attached are missing.

Oh yes, since i send the log inline, i haven't heard back at all.

> If you're in a hosted environment, you might think about asking your
> host to implement domain keys and/or PGP-signing your mail.  (Mailman
> is (was?) not friendly to domain keys of non-owner posters, but in the
> case of an announcement list having the host sign the post should work
> fine.)

I don't know whether i should do domain keys. Sofar it was never
a problem that we got tagged as spamers, it might be worth it
if more ISPs start to filter based on these. PGP is definitly
not an option. We send out way over 100k mails per day over mailinglists
(at some days it reaches even 200k mails/d). Signing all of them on the
server would produce too much load.
 
				Attila Kinali

-- 
Praised are the Fountains of Shelieth, the silver harp of the waters,
But blest in my name forever this stream that stanched my thirst!
                         -- Deed of Morred