Alan: did you look in your Junk folder?  Apparently HotMail thinks SN registration emails are spam.

Assigning to Brandon to see if there's some kind of way we can convince HotMail that we're not bad people.

I've set up a fresh hotmail account and registered it from the beta servers.  The registration emails do land in the Junk folder.  I've checked the source IPs of our emails (at all the datacenters) against some blacklist checking tools like http://www.mxtoolbox.com/blacklists.aspx and we're not any any blacklists they know of.  Additionally, we have proper SPF records on our domains, which makes Gmail more happy (these are Google-added spam status headers from when I remade my account via gmail a while back):

Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of registration@squeezenetwork.com designates 66.150.114.115 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.150.114.115;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of registration@squeezenetwork.com designates 66.150.114.115 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=registration@squeezenetwork.com

Looking at the raw content of the emails, I don't see any stupid red flags that would set off most spam filters (spammy words or formatting).  I'm inclined to just blame hotmail for being stupid.  I'll see if I can find anything we can do though.

I managed to sign up with "Windows Live Mail Smart Network Data Services", which is designed for large ISPs to get data from MS on how much spam their customers are sending to hotmail.  Basically because Equinix Frankfurt actually put my email address in the RIPE routing registry for our little /28 network block, MS recognizes me as an administrator for those IPs, so they'll let me see the spam info for them too.

I've sent a registration email manually from the DE rack to my testing hotmail account today.  Tomorrow I should be able to pull some info from their daily stat run on why they thought it was spam, maybe.

I'm making this a meta-bug for any further issues of this type in the near future.  If you find a case where the registration email from squeezenetwork is being junked by a major email provider, please comment here.

As of Mon Feb 25th, we've made a number very recent changes that should improve the situation

1) All of the email addresses in the registration emails were changed from @slimdevices.com to @squeezenetwork.com (so that spam heuristics match it better against the squeezenetwork.com hosts that are sending it, and for DK/DKIM (below))
2) We've fixed a problem with the hostnames being advertised in our HELO messages (they were unresolvable - this isn't important for delivery, but apparently some spam verification tools care).
3) We've added DomainKeys and DKIM DNS records to our DNS and added the appropriate public key signing support for all outbound mail from the SN racks.  This should help convince other ISPs of the legitimacy of our emails.

We've already had valid SPF (Sender Policy Framework) records in place for a while, which is another mechanism to assure ISPs about the legitimacy of the emails.

I would expect a lot of our Junk problems to go away now (on beta and future production), but if we still have lingering issues with any major providers we can try to sort them out here.

Another status update: I've added SPF records now to all of the hostnames we could send HELO from (as opposed to just the domain names in the From addresses), which may increase our validity further with some providers.  This change went out circa 11AM California time Mar 7 2008.

Re-targetting SN 7.0.1 bugs to ABBA release.

I reproduced this with a Yahoo account yesterday, the message went to the Bulk folder. 

The Password Reset emails are also going into the Yahoo/ATT spam filter.
===========
From SqueezeNetwork Registration Tue Apr 22 07:43:10 2008
Return-Path: <registration@squeezenetwork.com>
Authentication-Results: mta175.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com  from=squeezenetwork.com; domainkeys=pass (ok)
Received: from 207.115.20.156  (EHLO flpi116.prodigy.net) (207.115.20.156)
  by mta175.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:43:17 -0700
Received: from nat.okc.test.squeezenetwork.com (nat.okc.test.squeezenetwork.com [67.155.107.15])
	by flpi116.prodigy.net (8.13.8 inb regex/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m3MEhGnO003878
	for <jrichard@pacbell.net>; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:43:16 -0700
Received: from nat.okc.test.squeezenetwork.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by app01.okc.snpriv (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF83D7A03D6
	for <jrichard@pacbell.net>; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=squeezenetwork.com; h=to:
	from:reply-to:subject:message-id:date; q=dns/txt; s=sn; bh=aRewM
	PLI67gsWp6GEvkeMZm3jTc=; b=kvUjiwi45Gi4rgaaILE1sD6lglB/VQY/fttYx
	D7uI0Juegr6UOJLWjbvnlxISNNKkfPp6JRylCrkTUP4ijOin7GRC0KV5c4sWyGTK
	Z78cLbCanpeq9KIi3qOVveX9rsod9tgMeggfFbIx9MIN2Rw9N5r/Ud3OnRlpXKlR
	QYgQ6Y=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=squeezenetwork.com; h=to:from:
	reply-to:subject:message-id:date; q=dns; s=sn; b=dSVJcB98ZlfELz6
	0zCYUPIpjfOI42q7T9zsZ9q0zQ0L/k049x4zXTul0EXd1qcMhnmTJzw/ywxQYvNg
	69rYmNaFDvJe5kU4iVj7YEWgL0po30ea81vvBuKDoVXUi7CqRaWfRKBqQCyyJMyr
	4LgwB+vRDg1AUh4F94Eb46UEa7VQ=
Received: by app01.okc.snpriv (Postfix, from userid 5500)
	id 915DE7A03D7; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
To: jrichard@pacbell.net
From: SqueezeNetwork Registration <registration@squeezenetwork.com>
Reply-To: support@squeezenetwork.com
Subject: SqueezeNetwork Password for jrichard@pacbell.net
Message-Id: <20080422144310.915DE7A03D7@app01.okc.snpriv>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Length: 263
========

That was an email from test.sn, not production, that James quoted.  The test rack will necessarily have different spam characteristics than production, some of which is unavoidable, and it's not worth caring about.

This bug has recently been fixed in the latest release of SqueezeCenter 7.0.1

Please try that version, if you still see the error, then reopen this bug.

To download this version, please navigate to: http://www.slimdevices.com/su_downloads.html