On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Jack Coates wrote: > On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 14:49, Bill Mullen wrote: > ... > > Quite true, and one's best recourse in that situation is using the > > ISP's server as a relay, at least for the problem domains (I have to > > do that with a few). OTOH, that isn't what's happening to Michael, as > > his Postfix *can* send direct to the problem server(s), but only with > > certain clients having originated the message and given it to Postfix > > for delivery. > > > > Strange, isn't it? > > I wonder if it's triggering a oversensitive spam or virus checker by > having odd headers... I've just been messing with a CGI interface to > Spam Assassin, you can change a score from 6 to 8 just by using \r\n > line endings instead of \n and inserting spaces between Name and <email> > in the To and From headers...
Interesting, I didn't know that about SA. That's possible, I suppose - we haven't seen the full headers on any of these messages, just portions thereof ... OTOH, if it's only his boss' server that's doing the rejecting, *it* probably isn't seeing them either, because it won't let the delivery process get that far! ;) Then again, if it's his boss' server, $DEITY only knows why it is willing to listen to his Postfix box long enough to accept mail from it at all, when neither you nor I can even get it to listen to our telnet attempts long enough for us to say EHLO to it ... :( It's no wonder that the single most likely place to run into a sysadmin outside of the office is down at the local pub, eh? :) -- Bill Mullen [EMAIL PROTECTED] MA, USA RLU #270075 MDK 8.1 & 9.0 "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." - Douglas Adams
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
