[178020] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: gmail spam help
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ben Whorwood)
Thu Feb 12 11:28:14 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:27:56 +0000
From: Ben Whorwood <bw-ml@mube.co.uk>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <2a66901afc7246e989d9e393d3740855@exch2013-1.hq.nac.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
It may be worth taking a look at the Bulk Senders Guidelines to make
sure any additional steps suggested by Google (DKIM signing, etc) have
been taken:
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126?hl=en
It may also be that other Gmail users have flagged your emails as spam
in the past.
Thanks,
Ben
Apologies, the content of my last email was stripped.
On 12/02/15 15:41, Alex Rubenstein 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) that they recipient is reporting that the email is ending up in the Spam folder. 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.com>
>
> [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 question that there is no spamming going on from here.
>
> So, it’s 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.
>
