[178016] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: gmail spam help
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Pedro Cavaca)
Thu Feb 12 11:13:48 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <2a66901afc7246e989d9e393d3740855@exch2013-1.hq.nac.net>
From: Pedro Cavaca <pmsac.nanog@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:08:08 +0000
To: Alex Rubenstein <alex@corp.nac.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
See
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126
which may take you to
https://support.google.com/mail/troubleshooter/2696779
and eventually to
https://support.google.com/mail/contact/bulk_send_new?hl=3Den&rd=3D1
HTH.
On 12 February 2015 at 15:41, Alex Rubenstein <alex@corp.nac.net> wrote:
> I should have been clearer.
>
> I have been getting complaints from my sales folks that when they send
> emails to people who use gmail (either a gmail account or google apps) th=
at
> they recipient is reporting that the email is ending up in the Spam folde=
r.
> So, I tested this myself, sending an email from alex@corp.nac.net<mailto:
> alex@corp.nac.net> to rubenstein45@gmail.com<mailto:rubenstein45@gmail.co=
m
> >
>
> [cid:image001.png@01D046AD.3B2FA890]
>
> This is curious to me, since @corp.nac.net is a small exchange
> implementation with only about 50 users behind it, and there is no questi=
on
> that there is no spamming going on from here.
>
> So, it=E2=80=99s not a question of adding a filter or not using gmail; it=
is not
> me who is using gmail in this problem.
>
>
>
> From: Josh Luthman [mailto:josh@imaginenetworksllc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 9:32 AM
> To: Alex Rubenstein
> Cc: NANOG list
> Subject: Re: gmail spam help
>
>
> Create a filter.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Feb 12, 2015 8:11 AM, "Alex Rubenstein" <alex@corp.nac.net<mailto:
> alex@corp.nac.net>> wrote:
> Is there anyone on-list that can help me with a world -> gmail email
> issue, where email is being considering spam by gmail erroneously?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
