Re: Both rules should not be executed

2012-06-09 Thread Cecil Westerhof
Op zaterdag 9 jun 2012 14:01 CEST schreef RW: > On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 11:52:58 +0200 > Cecil Westerhof wrote: > >> A few of the mails on this group came in my spam folder because of: >> 2.9 SPOOF_COM2OTH URI: URI contains ".com" in middle >> 2.0 SPOOF_COM2COM URI: URI contains ".com" in mid

Re: Both rules should not be executed

2012-06-09 Thread RW
On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 11:52:58 +0200 Cecil Westerhof wrote: > A few of the mails on this group came in my spam folder because of: > 2.9 SPOOF_COM2OTH URI: URI contains ".com" in middle > 2.0 SPOOF_COM2COM URI: URI contains ".com" in middle and end > > Personally I think that the

Re: Both rules should not be executed

2012-06-09 Thread Benny Pedersen
Den 2012-06-09 11:52, Cecil Westerhof skrev: A few of the mails on this group came in my spam folder because of: 2.9 SPOOF_COM2OTH URI: URI contains ".com" in middle 2.0 SPOOF_COM2COM URI: URI contains ".com" in middle and end Personally I think that the second one should n

Both rules should not be executed

2012-06-09 Thread Cecil Westerhof
A few of the mails on this group came in my spam folder because of: 2.9 SPOOF_COM2OTH URI: URI contains ".com" in middle 2.0 SPOOF_COM2COM URI: URI contains ".com" in middle and end Personally I think that the second one should not be used when the first is already triggered.