Gee,
Me too, this is what I have been complaining about, and submitted an
unresolved trouble ticket [INN-34053] since the first 2.x release.
I've got it half working by changing my global config to:
WEIGHT20weightrangexxxx
WEIGHT32weightxxxx
fill in your
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:44 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Version 2.x, High-Weight Junkmail Not
Deleted
Gee,
Me too, this is what I have been complaining about, and submitted an
unresolved trouble ticket [INN
://www.HM-Software.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 08:44 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Version 2.x, High-Weight Junkmail Not
Deleted
Gee,
Me too, this is what
Title: Message
Andy Schmidt wrote:
The message is NOT whitelisted (see log and
header), sothe bypass whitelisting WORKED. The log and headers look
differently, if whilelisting is effective.
...assuming that there isn't a bug. There is definitely something
strange here and several
Title: Message
Hi
Matt:
I would also
assume that you are scoring tests such as SNIFFER, INV-URIBL and NJABLDYNA, but
it doesn't appear that these scores were added according to your headers
I
think I can explain most of that.
a) I
have several "combo" tests that do the actual
r, NJ 07458-1846
Phone: +1 201 934-3414
x20 (Business)
Fax: +1 201 934-9206
http://www.HM-Software.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 10:32 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@d
Title: Message
Hm,
I may
have an idea...
I have the feeling
the problem may be with the "POSTMASTER" filter. The idea behind it is -
if any of the recipients are my [EMAIL PROTECTED] account, then "drop"
all other recipients and ROUTETO that email ONLY to the postmaster
address. This
Title: Message
I saw
the samething today after installing 2.05. I went back to 1.82 after about 10
minutes.
Kevin
Bilbee
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Andy SchmidtSent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005
8:23 PMTo:
Title: Message
I
don't have actions for different recipients.
So in
my case all recipients have the SAME action.
Except
that now ROUTETO outranks DELETE.
Best
RegardsAndy SchmidtPhone: +1 201 934-3414 x20
(Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL
Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20
(Business)
Fax: +1 201 934-9206
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 11:55 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Version 2.x
Title: Message
The
message is NOT whitelisted (see log and header), sothe bypass whitelisting
WORKED. The log and headers look differently, if whilelisting is
effective.
The
purpose of the bypass whitelisting is:
if
weight = 12 and recipients = 6 - bypass the
whitelist
if
weight = 14
11 matches
Mail list logo
