From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2498 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2016 14:55:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 2449 invoked by uid 89); 2 Nov 2016 14:55:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=price, resubscribe, UD:support.google.com, supportgooglecom X-HELO: filter01.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net Received: from filter01.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net (HELO filter01.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net) (199.224.80.228) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Nov 2016 14:55:27 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filter01.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7347986844 for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 14:55:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay04.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net ([199.224.80.247]) by localhost (filter01.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net [199.224.80.228]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 3zlXyGu6sYaf for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 14:55:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Previous-IP: 32.217.38.227 Received: from ffortso4 (unknown [32.217.38.227]) by relay04.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 42D5943801 for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 14:55:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 14:55:00 -0000 From: Jack Subject: Re: ezmlm warning To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <5819C347.3040705@gmail.com> <0b7200a7-fc6c-efb5-c4e6-cab33ae93047@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <0b7200a7-fc6c-efb5-c4e6-cab33ae93047@redhat.com> (from eblake@redhat.com on Wed Nov 2 09:04:49 2016) Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 On 2016.11.02 09:04, Eric Blake wrote: > On 11/02/2016 05:43 AM, Andrey ``Bass'' Shcheglov wrote: >> Remote host said: 550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from vanav.org is=20=20 >> not accepted due to domain's > 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please=20=20 >> contact the administrator of vanav.org domain if > 550-5.7.1 this=20=20 >> was a legitimate mail. Please visit > 550-5.7.1 >=20 > yahoo.com has already been doing this for a while, now gmail.com is=20=20 > doing it too :( >=20 > In addition to the link you quoted: >=20 > > https://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 >=20 > here's another one: > https://wiki.list.org/DOC/What%20can%20I%20do%20about%20members%20being%2= 0unsubscribed%20by%20bounces%20of%20Yahoo%20user's%20posts%20for%20DMARC%20= policy%20reasons%3F >=20 > The problem is that the mailman instance running the cygwin mailing=20=20 > list (and ALL lists hosted by sourceware, for that matter) needs to=20=20 > be reconfigured to cope with stricter DMARC rules. I'm not an admin,=20= =20 > so you will need to redirect this request to the postmaster that=20=20 > manages cygwin's mailman instance. >=20 > In the meantime, the only "workaround" is to subscribe to the list=20=20 > using an address that isn't quite as nasty about DMARC rules. It's=20=20 > sad that more and more sites are clamping down, but that's the price=20=20 > we pay for spammers. I recently ran into the same problem sending to a KDE list. In my=20=20 case, I was using a sourceforge.net FROM: address, but actually sending=20= =20 through my ISP (frontier.com). Sourceforge had the DMARC policy that=20=20 mail claiming to be from sourceforge.net should not be accepted if it=20=20 came from anywhere else. I think the final solution was for them to=20=20 drop that rule, since at least one of the uses of sourceforge is=20=20 exactly that type of aliasing. I don't think gmail will do the same. You are using a gmail.com address, but it looks like you might have=20=20 sent it from vanav.org. In this case, I suspect your only solution=20=20 will be to actually send mail from gmail.com using the gmail.com smtp=20=20 server. Eric's suggestion to resubscribe from an address at a site which is=20=20 less strict about DMARC rules would work, but I think the underlying=20=20 issue will arise again, as long as you use an smtp server other than=20=20 the one from the From: address you are using. Jack -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple