Search Results

Search found 10 results on 1 pages for 'deliverability'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Email deliverability -- Whitelist solution or Email delivery service?

  - by JoefrshnJoeclean

  Hey Folks -- our company is encountering the same recurring problem - email deliverability. A lot of our emails are still getting trapped in yahoo and gmail spam filters. We followed yahoo's best practices guide as well as tips Ive found on serverfault. (setting up DKIM, SPF) And even took the Email Server Test (http://www.allaboutspam.com/email-server-test/) Now my question is: has anyone had success using whitelist solutions like goodmail or EmailReach? Alternatively, Im beginning to think that going with a email delivery service like Mailchimp will save me the headache and future stress of managing our email lists. So whitelist solution or just fork up the money and send via an email delivery service? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Email Deliverability on Yahoo is very poor. Any suggestions please?

  - by xarejay28x

  All other ISPs (Google, AOL, Hotmail) are fantastic, hitting 98-100% in the inbox. Yahoo is very random, and lately our deliverability has dropped drastically. All IPs are senders certified by Return Path and supposedly that automatically whitelists our IPs and allows us to send as many emails as we want (from what my boss says). Do I bother with applying to Yahoo's bulk sender form? I run every email campaign through: SpamAssassin (Excellent Scores) Test Accounts (for test deliverability) Old school HTML format I'm running out of ideas and I'm starting to be in the hot seat and I am very fearful for my job position. If you can offer any wise words i will be very grateful. Thank you in advance.

  Read the article

• Is sending email from EC2 / Rackspace Cloud a bad idea?

  - by Michael Buckbee

  In this article it mentions that TrendMicro is now treating all emails from Amazon's EC2 as coming from "Dial Up Users": likely to be spam and this is creating severe deliverability issues with their emails. We're having all kinds of issues sending email from our app servers on Rackspace cloud (which may or may not be DUL'd) and I wonder if this isn't just a losing battle and we should try to get a different host for our SMTP server.

  Read the article

• Hotmail mail delivery issue (spam)

  - by chaochito

  Hello, I am running a Postfix server in a dedicated server in a Linux environment (centOS 5.3) for a social networking web application and are experiencing deliverability issues with Hotmail (I can send mails to Gmail, Yahoo, Aol in inbox). I only send legit mails for registered users (notifications). I have SPF, DK and DKIM setup. I pass the Sender ID test when mailing to [email protected] but we have "X-Auth-Result : None" only in Hotmail headers and no X-SID-Result:Pass. We have been enrolled in their program for more than 2 weeks and normally when you apply to their Sender ID program you are supposed to have X-SID-Result:Pass and X-Auth-Result:Pass. I contacted Hotmail about the issue and they told me that my domain looks like added to Sender ID in their system this is beyond their support and asked me to contact my ISP. As you can imagine, my ISP has no clue about that either. I don't really know what could be wrong... Mails are currently filtered as spam and we would like to be able to have them landing in inbox.

  Read the article

• Sendmail: external alias not receiving relayed mail under certain circumstances.

  - by ben

  I have set up an alias in /etc/mail/aliases like this: user: [email protected] This relay DOES work when I telnet to example.com 25 and send mail to [email protected] (where example.com is my domain); it indeed turns up in [email protected] inbox. Also mail sent from my server at example.com is generally deliverable to this same email address, [email protected]. HOWEVER, the relay DOES NOT work when I send mail from [email protected] to [email protected], expecting it to be relayed back to [email protected]. The mail.log shows it being received and sent just fine, so I guess it is being blocked by gmail for some reason. Why though? As I said, gmail generally does except mail from this server.

  Read the article

• SMTP host name vs. domain in "From:" address vis-a-vis Email Deliverability

  - by Jared Duncan

  I'm trying to implement (or make sure that I'm correctly following) email sending best practices to improve deliverability, but the role of the smtp server's host name vs the domain name of the From: email address seems to be unclear, even after reading dozens of people's articles/input. Specifically, I understand that to satisfy the reverse DNS check, there must be a PTR record for the IP address of the sending machine that yields a domain name that matches the host name of the sending machine / SMTP server. Some say it needs to match the one given by the "hostname" command, most say it's the one provided with the HELO / EHLO statement, and this guy even says they MUST be the same (according to / enforced by what, I don't know; that's only a minor point of confusion, anyhow). First, what I can't find anywhere is whether or not the domain name of the From: email address needs to match the domain name of the SMTP server. So in my case, I have a VPS with linode. It primarily hosts a particular domain of mine, example.com, but I also sometimes do work on other projects: foo.com and bar.com. So what I'm wondering is if I can just leave the default linode PTR record (which resolves to abc.def.linode.com), make sure that abc.def.linode.com is what my mail server (qmail) is configured to say at HELO, and then proceed to use it to send out emails for example.com, foo.com, et al. If so, then I am confused by the advice given here, specifically (in a listing of bad case scenarios): No SPF record for the domain being used in the HELO command Why would THAT domain need an SPF record? And if it does, which domain should it provide whitelisting for: the HELO domain, or the domain of the From: email address (envelope sender)? Also, which domain would need to accept mail sent to [email protected]? If the domains must be the same, that would seem rather limiting to me, because then for every domain you wanted to send email from, you'd have to get another IP address for it. It would also compromise or ruin one's ability to do non-email sending things (e.g. wget) relatively anonymously. However, the upside--if this is the case--is that it would make for a far less confusing setup. I'm currently using the linode.com SMTP+PTR domain and example.com From: address combination without much of any deliverability issue, but my volume is very low and I'd like to know if someone out there has experience with larger volumes and has specifically tested the difference and/or has inside knowledge and/or has an authoritative answer (and source) for this particular question. I'm happy to clarify anything, let me know. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Is there a difference between plain text emails, and multipart emails with only plain text?

  - by Brian Armstrong

  I'm using Rails to send emails and I just want to send a plain text email (there is no corresponding HTML part). I've noticed that if I just have one file named email.text.plain.erb it actually generates a multipart email with one part (the plain text part) like this: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=mimepart_4c04a2d34c4bb_690a4e56b0362 --mimepart_4c04a2d34c4bb_690a4e56b0362 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline text of the email here... --mimepart_4c04a2d34c4bb_690a4e56b0362-- But if I take out the text.plain part and name it email.erb ActionMailer generates a regular plain text email without multipart like this: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 text of the email here... Both work fine most of the time (so this is kind of nitpicky), but I guess my question is whether the second one is more correct. My goal here is just to make sure deliverability is as high as possible across a wide variety of devices and email clients. I've read that plain text emails can have slightly better deliverability rates than html and was just curious if throwing in this multipart (even if it only contained a plain text part) might throw off some of the dumber email clients. Thanks for your help!

  Read the article

• Is it a good practice to run identd in 2010?

  - by Alex R

  I know in the "old days" it was good practice to shut this off. But nowadays I have heard that it improves deliverability of email. In the old days people were not worried about spam (or having their outbound email rejected), so that made sense. Of course, the question is only relevant to servers that send email. What is the current, common practice among discerning Linux admins? Run identd or leave it off? Thanks

  Read the article

• Using a SMTP Service for email

  - by Josh S.

  This may be a horribly obvious question, but I'm learning and just need someone to confirm it for me. I putting together a private social network that needs to email their members (through the social network software, Elgg) regularly. I'm hosting it on a shared HostGator plan (because they won't receive much traffic) and they'll email 10-1000 emails a few times a week. HostGator restricts you to 500 per hour. I'm also worried about deliverability. I've been searching up and down about how to throttle the emails so it will all send reliably... but then I came across the idea of an outside SMTP relay service. Would using an SMTP service resolve this issue? If so, any opinions on quality SMTP services?

  Read the article

• Will this SPF record restrict delivery of email for the original domain?

  - by user199421

  As part of the product we offer we send emails on behalf of our clients. Because the emails don't come from an IP associated with the client they are sometimes flagged as spam. We advised some of our clients to add an SPF record approving us to send emails on their behalf. We saw immediate improvement in deliverability rates after making the change however one of our clients was notified by his hosting provider that the SPF record we suggested to add would "slightly restrict" all emails that don't come from our servers (including our client's own servers). The record we use is this: v=spf1 a mx include:ourdomain.com ~all So my question is if the warning we received about this is correct and if so why and what can be done to solve this (allow sending email both from original domain and by ourselves).

  Read the article

1