Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 00:03:21 -0400 From: "Mike B." <yahoo at omniphile.com> To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net> Subject: [WSFA] Re: Yahoo problem Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net> On 4/16/2014 11:20 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote: > And here are the error messages. (I'm only listing one of each. > I got one such message on behalf of every user on any of those > three ISPs.) > > <swstiles at comcast.net>: host mx1.comcast.net[68.87.26.147] said: 550 = 5.2.0 > qluf1n00M1vDEHA0QlufNK Message rejected due to DMARC. Please see > http://postmaster.comcast.net/smtp-error-codes.php#DM000001 (in rep= ly to > end of DATA command) > <macbuccfo at email.msn.com>: host mx4.hotmail.com[65.55.92.136] said: 5= 50 5.7.0 > (SNT0-MC1-F48) Unfortunately, messages from (166.84.1.89) on behalf= of > (yahoo.com) could not be delivered due to domain owner policy restr= ictions. > (in reply to end of DATA command) > > <dicconf at yahoo.com>: host mta7.am0.yahoodns.net[63.250.192.46] said: = 554 5.7.9 > Message not accepted for policy reasons. See > http://postmaster.yahoo.com/errors/postmaster-28.html (in reply to = end of > DATA command) > > There's no point in my contacting Comcast, MSN, or Yahoo, since I'm > not their customer. Would those of you who are their customers please > ask them what's going on and how to fix it? Thanks. > > Until this is resolved, would those of you who have both a Yahoo > account and another account please only post from the latter? Thanks. Comcast's link says that a 550 error is: ----- 550 - [Not our customer] This error results when a message is sent to a non-existent Comcast customer. These errors should be treated as an "unsubscribe" by the sender, if a bulk mailer. ----- That would indicate that SWstiles at comcast.net is not a valid account, but their mention of rejection due to DMARC, and your statement that you = got this for all comcast users on the list, makes it look more like a different problem having to do with the KeithLynch.net domain not being acceptable to comcast. Not sure if that's right...don't have time right now to investigate any further. DMARC is intended to reduce spam, phishing, and spoofing. Info at: http://dmarc.org/faq.html Yahoo is having a similar issue. For the 554 5.7.9 error they say, in par= t: https://help.yahoo.com/kb/SLN7253.html?impressions=true ----- Your message wasn't delivered because Yahoo was unable to verify that it = came from a legitimate email sender. Your email failed one or more of the following industry-wide authentication checks that Yahoo uses to verify emails are truly sent from the domains they claim to originate from. Click an authentication method's link below to learn more. DKIM (Domain-Keys Identified Mail) SPF (Sender Policy Framework) DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance) These standards are designed to eliminate an email user=92s exposure to potentially fraudulent and harmful messages and have been adopted by all = major email providers and many technology companies. Yahoo recently changed our DMARC policy This was done to proactively protect our users from increasing email forgery spam. Visit our Yahoo Mail Tumblr page to learn more about this policy change and what you can do to address sending issues to Yahoo Mail addresses. ----- MSN, in keeping with MicroSoft's "don't help unless they pay you" policies, doesn't have an easy way to say what their problem is, but it's probably similar. If it is DMARC issues, there's nothing the subscribers can do about it...the problem is that the KeithLynch.net domain isn't playing well with DMARC-using mail servers, and they won't accept e-mail from it. That's something that the KeithLynch.net domain owner will have to deal with...or give up sending e-mail to those receivers. While that may be an initial answer, if things like DMARC spread, eventually it won't be possible to send email much of anywhere. I don't know enough about DMARC = at this point to tell what would need to change...it could be something like setting up SPF records, or asking to be whitelisted, or something el= se. Back when I was webmaster for mchog.com, Verizon started rejecting mail sent to Verizon user accounts because we'd sent more than 50 copies of the same message to various Verizon users. That triggered their anti-spam system (because they are idiots in how they configured it...we = had over 1000 members, and Verizon is a major provider, and the chances that 51 of our members were their customers was very high). What we'd sent was the monthly club newsletter, and all users it was sent to had subscribed to receive it (opt-in system). I had to get our network provider (pair.com) to send them a request to whitelist our domain, attesting that we weren't spammers and were operating an opt-in e-mail list. Verizon whitelisted us...for a month, then they forgot and I had to do it again. After that it was ok and no further issues. It's possible something like that has triggered these three big providers to start blocking mail from this list. Good luck. -- Mike B.