On Tue, 4 May 2010, Greg Troxel wrote:
Thanks - I did pretty much understand the tests. What I'm boggled about
is that they suddenly started firing, and then now suddenly do not.
This is perfectly consistent with the explanation I offered at the
beginning of this thread. A legitimate Google
Charles Gregory cgreg...@hwcn.org writes:
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Greg Troxel wrote:
Thanks - I did pretty much understand the tests. What I'm boggled
about is that they suddenly started firing, and then now suddenly do
not.
This is perfectly consistent with the explanation I offered at the
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Greg Troxel wrote:
I use spamassass-milter and reject at about 8 points. Normally this is
fine. I just got a few false positives.
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 15:48 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Greg Troxel wrote:
I use spamassass-milter and reject at about 8 points. Normally this is
fine. I just got a few false positives.
DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX,HELO_NO_DOMAIN,RCVD_IN_PBL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL,RDNS_NONE
It
Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de writes:
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 15:48 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Greg Troxel wrote:
I use spamassass-milter and reject at about 8 points. Normally this is
fine. I just got a few false positives.
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 17:37 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de writes:
Translations of the rules? An Outlook user submitted directly to your MX
without using his own SMTP. The SMTP HELO looks bad. The mail has been
submitted from an IP, that's not supposed
Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de writes:
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 17:37 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de writes:
Translations of the rules? An Outlook user submitted directly to your MX
without using his own SMTP. The SMTP HELO looks bad. The
