On 18/8/05 04:31, "Robert A. Rosenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 18:50 -0700 on 08/16/2005, George wrote about Re: Rule for 172.xxx.xxx.xxx: > >> On 8/16/05 5:46 PM, "Robert A. Rosenberg" wrote: >> >>> Otherwise it will trigger on *.172.* >> >> Not a problem. That was an example. >> George > > The query asked "Is there a way to set up a rule to assign to the > junk folder, or delete, incoming mail from 172.xxx.xxx.xxx" - IOW: > Trap Network 172 mail. I still claim that just checking for "172." in > lieu of "[172." will trigger on ANY address where the 2nd or 3d level > of the address is 172 in addition to the desired Network 172 > addresses. Can you show me where this observation is inaccurate (ie: > where checking for "172." will ignore x.172.x.x and/or x.x.172.x > addresses)? > > Thank you. I read the 'not a problem' comment to refer to your remarks about this list's address, not the point yo refer to here. -- Barry Wainwright Microsoft MVP (see http://mvp.support.microsoft.com for details) Seen the All-New Entourage Help Pages? - Check them out: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/> -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/> old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
