* Benoit Panizzon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Did you have success with this settings? They don't seam to have any effect
> on
> the installation of two of our customers... They still bounceflood some
> innocents.
Of course i did. I just rechecked it, and recorded the Session:
(I wrote a > before e
* Roger Leemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> Go into ESM, Global Settings, "Nachrichtenübermittlung",
> >> "Empfängerfilterung" and check the "Empfänger filtern, die nicht
> >> im Verzeichnis vorhanden sind".
> Is this XCHN 2003?
Yes. It currently the only Exchange Version with "Mainstream"
Support ;
Hi
>> Go into ESM, Global Settings, "Nachrichtenübermittlung",
>> "Empfängerfilterung" and check the "Empfänger filtern, die nicht
>> im Verzeichnis vorhanden sind".
Is this XCHN 2003?
Roger
___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.
Am Montag, 30. Januar 2006 19.59 schrieb Lukas Beeler:
> * Benoit Panizzon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Isn't there any way to make exchange reject unknown users during smtp
> > handshake like all other MTA do?
>
> Of course there is:
>
> Go into ESM, Global Settings, "Nachrichtenübermittlung",
> "Empf
Salut,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 07:47:09PM +0100, Folken wrote:
> - install second server infront of the machine
> - install postfix on it
> - added greylisting, rbls, spamassassin, razor checks
> - get this perl magic script to fetch all valid accounts from active
> directory on the exchange ser
* Benoit Panizzon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Isn't there any way to make exchange reject unknown users during smtp
> handshake like all other MTA do?
Of course there is:
Go into ESM, Global Settings, "Nachrichtenübermittlung",
"Empfängerfilterung" and check the "Empfänger filtern, die nicht
im Verze
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 09:34 +0100, Benoit Panizzon wrote:
> Isn't there any way to make exchange reject unknown users during smtp
> handshake like all other MTA do?
Well.. I had a similar host running exchange 2k. It was getting around
28000 spam messages delivered a day, due to the above handlin
'llo,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Why would you subject internally generated mail to blacklist
> processing at all?
good question. Problem is that my central mail-relay is shown to the
outside (as a mail relay is supposed to be) - and it generates some
triggers and alert mails upon special events
> I kicked Spamcop when they started blacklisting 127.0.0.1 so that no
> system logs could be sent out by E-Mail...
Why would you subject internally generated mail to blacklist
processing at all? I find it a bit questionable to use any blacklists
in a binary fashion (unless you're _really_ 100% in
Hi all,
Tobias Orlamuende wrote:
> Anyway IMHO classifying mailservers as "spam"-servers just because of
> auto-responders is one thing why I would never use blacklists like spamcop.
> Imagine you have customers with so-called "catch-all" or "multidrop" accounts
> which are also using auto-resp
Please tell! Using
another server for sending bounces/auto-responders is IMHO not a solution.
Cheers
Tobias
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Benoit Panizzon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Montag, 30. Januar 2006 09:35
An: swinog@swinog.ch
Betreff: [swinog] Prevent Bounces from MS
Hi all
We got occasional complaint from spamcop and similar about exchange servers of
customers sending bounces to faked sender addresses.
The only way to solve this problem I have found is to completely disable NDR
in Exchange:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;294757
Is
12 matches
Mail list logo
