Re: denial of service?

2016-05-10 Thread Edgar Pettijohn
Sent from my iPhone > On May 10, 2016, at 11:10 AM, Gilles Chehade wrote: > >> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:56:10AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: >> >> >>> On 05/10/16 10:29, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:11:48AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: Sharing with the list

Re: Fwd: Re: denial of service?

2016-05-10 Thread Gilles Chehade
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:56:10AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > > > On 05/10/16 10:29, Gilles Chehade wrote: > >On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:11:48AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > >>Sharing with the list at Gilles request. > >> > >>To me it seems like at some point the daemon was treating my ou

Re: Fwd: Re: denial of service?

2016-05-10 Thread Edgar Pettijohn
On 05/10/16 10:29, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:11:48AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: Sharing with the list at Gilles request. To me it seems like at some point the daemon was treating my outgoing mail as incoming mail and refusing it because they weren't legal recipients.

Re: Fwd: Re: denial of service?

2016-05-10 Thread Gilles Chehade
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:11:48AM -0500, Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > Sharing with the list at Gilles request. > > To me it seems like at some point the daemon was treating my outgoing mail > as incoming mail and refusing it because they weren't legal recipients. > > Enjoy, > Actually I'm unsure I