| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
| Cc: | Matthias Apitz <gurucubano(at)googlemail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature |
| Date: | 2025-02-24 14:48:27 |
| Message-ID: | 1335322.1740408507@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> Unsigned mails(these days SPF, DKIM and DMARFC are not optional any
> more) are basically undeliverable at scale to all large mail providers
> other than if you are a super low volume sender - so that is a complete
> non-starter for us.
Yeah. The key point here is that we are not constrained only by
what it says in the RFCs. We have to stay on the good side of the
anti-spam policies at gmail and other large email providers, or
we'll be blocked from delivering to large swaths of our user base.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2025-02-24 15:47:26 | Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature |
| Previous Message | me nefcanto | 2025-02-24 14:09:14 | Re: Bug in copy |