Reverse DNS should be less generic

[zamentur]

If we have a domain (not a subdomain) as reverse DNS, some email tools says it's bad. Here a warning from the blacklist https://csi.cloudmark.com/en/reset (used by orange). I already see that on an other tools.

Warning: The submitted IP (89.234.141.77) appears to match a generic or default pattern

The DNS pointer record for this IP (sans-nuage.fr.) appears to match a generic or default pattern that is often associated with spam. Cloudmark will not continue to remediate such IP addresses.

Please could you update the rDNS on this IP to be something more specific to the sender and/or your organisation rather than the generic pattern that the provider has assigned by default. You may need to contact your provider in order to accomplish this rDNS change.

For instance mail.example.com would be considered far less generic than 208-83-136-1.sfo.example.com or hosted-by.example.com

Suggestion

We should consider to rethink our email configuration or to add a diagnosis warning about this point.

A problem is that the maindomain covers other parts than mail configuration.

[alexAubin]

I don't understand x_x .. Isn't the point of reverse DNS to point to a domain ? Why should it "not generic" and what does that even mean ? Why ? « a generic or default pattern that is often associated with spam » ... Like what the hell ... Why would "mail.example.com" be less generic than "hosted-by.example.com" :facepalm:

Imho this is just yet another stupid arbitrary antispam rule arbitrarily decided by random companies while other "open standard" antispam features are not fully enforced for whatever reason.