gmail dropping mesages

Franck Martin fmartin at
Fri Apr 22 23:01:01 UTC 2011

On 4/23/11 10:41 , "Alex Brooks" <askoorb+nanog at> wrote:

>On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Franck Martin <fmartin at>
>> What is the DKIM check result for those messages?
>Non existent, it's SPF only.

My point.

>This is what GMail sees:
>Received: from ( [])
>        by with ESMTPS id
>        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
>        Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
>Received-SPF: pass ( best guess record for domain of
> at designates
> as permitted sender) client-ip=;
>Authentication-Results:; spf=pass ( best
>guess record for domain of
> at designates
> as permitted sender)
> at
>> May be time to get nanog mailing list DKIM aware?
>> On 4/22/11 13:24 , "Bill Blackford" <bblackford at> wrote:
>>>I've recently observed gmail dropping messages or not forwarding all
>>>messages/posts  from the nanog list. This is rather annoying.
>>>Has anyone else experienced this? Does anyone have any insight as to
>Yes,  for example, the message I'm replying to had this at the top of it:
>"Due to a filter you created, this message was not sent to Spam. Edit
>"Warning: This message may not be from whom it claims to be. Beware of
>following any links in it or of providing the sender with any personal
>information.  Learn more"
>So GMail thinks it's a phishing message :-/

Because from: may be from a domain which is known to DKIM sign
everything.... (like gmail).

>Quite a lot of my Nanog messages are marked as spam, which is why I
>created a filter to not send any messages with a list ID header with
> in it to spam at all.
>The only way for Nanog to get round this would be for the mail
>administrator to follow *every* step at
>  which
>basically is:
>- Explicit SPF with hard fail.
>- Signing with DKIM or DomainKeys.
>- Useing a consistent IP address to send bulk mail.
>- Keeping valid reverse DNS records for the IP address(es) from which
>mail is sent, pointing to the sending domain.
>- Use the same address in the 'From:' header on every bulk mail that is
>- Using the "Precedence: bulk" header.
>- Up-to-date contact information in the WHOIS record, and on
>But the list administrator would have to do all of that faff.

No, it is mailman, just upgrade mailman. Recent versions are more DKIM

More info:

More information about the NANOG mailing list