On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Christopher Ambler wrote:
> Is Exchange broken? Undoubtedly so. Is there a way that a clueful
> user can overcome the break? Absolutely. Should the software be
> "banned?" Of course not. If anything, unsubscribe those users who
> can't take the trouble to ensure that their sy
> I'm saying that people who are too lazy or witless to pick software that
> does not cause them to make pests of themselves have no place trying to
> develop network protocols.
I'm sorry, but I take offense at this. I am neither lazy nor witless, and I
chose Exchange. I configured it around it
> From: Ted Gavin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> First, I'm no Microsoft advocate. I was a mail administrator for some
> number of years in the course of which, I had to deal with Microsoft
> messaging products.
As such, you should look around at other systems and perhaps even
read what people hav
Ted Gavin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Those persons who are responsible for managing Microsoft Exchange
> implementations should know that Out-Of-Office responses, as well as
> anti-virus application auto-notifications can be given permission to
> send to the Internet, just as they can be DENIE
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:28:48 -0700 (MST), Vernon Schryver
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> From: John Stracke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> > I don't agree, and merely wanted to point out that other mail systems
>> > have the same problem. There is anti-virus software for Notes, too.
>>
>> But a sane mai
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Christopher Ambler wrote:
> Knowing the software in question, it seemed pretty clear to me that this
> was a case of user error. My virus scanning software doesn't send return
> email. My vacation notices are configured to only send once to each
> sender, and then only to sen
> From: John Stracke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I don't agree, and merely wanted to point out that other mail systems
> > have the same problem. There is anti-virus software for Notes, too.
>
> But a sane mail system does not *spread* viruses.
And people I'd want to hire even indirectly through a r
Christopher Ambler wrote:
> I don't agree, and merely wanted to point out that other mail systems
> have the same problem. There is anti-virus software for Notes, too.
But a sane mail system does not *spread* viruses.
> To say that IMS is "designed to be a trojan horse" just seems a little
> of
> By my count, that's 7 to 3 in favor of "Internet Mail Service".
>
> What is your count?
My count is 4 to 2 right now, but I have no reason to doubt you,
and believe that it will equal your count shortly.
> Any system can be messed up. I blame only the first of the four notices
> from [EMAIL
> From: "Christopher Ambler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Given the duration and frequency of vacation notice abuse from
> > users of "Internet Mail Service," the fault is in the software
> > instead of those who configure it.
>
> This is what I mean. You're singling out one product. I just got
> a bu
> Given the duration and frequency of vacation notice abuse from
> users of "Internet Mail Service," the fault is in the software
> instead of those who configure it.
This is what I mean. You're singling out one product. I just got
a bunch of vacation notices. Quite a few looked like this one,
be
> From: "Christopher Ambler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
> > Although I know it's hopeless, I still say the right thing is for the
> > IETF to automatically unsubscribe anyone whose mail bears the tell tail
> > "X-Mailer: In
> Although I know it's hopeless, I still say the right thing is for the
> IETF to automatically unsubscribe anyone whose mail bears the tell tail
> "X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service".
> By tolerating the malware and being "inclusive" of those who insist on
> abusing the rest of us with it, the I
> From: Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> > Anyone who has posted to the IETF list in the last week or two has
> > gotten literally dozens of "out of office notification" messages from
> > Microsoft Exchange clients. ...
> i'll see ya' and raise ya' o ne better. mailing list owners get th
> Anyone who has posted to the IETF list in the last week or two has
> gotten literally dozens of "out of office notification" messages from
> Microsoft Exchange clients. You would think the largest application
> software provider in the world would understand the difference between
> envelope and
Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> actually, if it is a delivery failure notification, 1123 5.3.3 would seem
> to apply. mail bounces are to be sent to the MAIL FROM: not the original
> sender. or even if they were sent to the from: we would not see them.
>
> this has been designed to b
actually, if it is a delivery failure notification, 1123 5.3.3 would seem
to apply. mail bounces are to be sent to the MAIL FROM: not the original
sender. or even if they were sent to the from: we would not see them.
this has been designed to be max annoying. get the word out. tell
folk NOT
So we're getting to see the latest non-feature from the Virus scanning
legions. Earlier today someone spammed the IETF list with a message
containing a virus. This may or may not have been on purpose (virus may
have sent itself to the ietf list). That accounted for 3 messages seen
here.
Since the
18 matches
Mail list logo
