Ray Dzek wrote:
> Just as a side note...
>
> I am a charter customer. I have spoken with their techincal assistance
> many times, and at various levels, for myself and on behalf of others I
> have tried to assist. They are by far the most incompetent ISP I have
> ever dealt with. They only have
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Jonn R Taylor wrote on Fri, 24 Aug 2007 07:30:22 -0500:
What even more
interesting is that they block 25 out going. So I am not sure why we all
see so much spam from them.
The spam is comming from *.dhcp.*.*.charter.com. Obviously, there's no such
blockage. I r
al Message-
From: Jonn R Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 5:30 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: charter.net
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote on Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:59:11 -0400:
I think it's a brain-dead attempt to counter th
Jonn R Taylor wrote on Fri, 24 Aug 2007 07:30:22 -0500:
> What even more
> interesting is that they block 25 out going. So I am not sure why we all
> see so much spam from them.
The spam is comming from *.dhcp.*.*.charter.com. Obviously, there's no such
blockage. I reject everything from there
m: Jonn R Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 5:30 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: charter.net
>
> Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> > Matt Kettler wrote on Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:59:11 -0400:
> >
> >> I think it's a b
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote on Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:59:11 -0400:
I think it's a brain-dead attempt to counter the image and pdf
spams that have been so popular lately.
It would be nice if they would block their outgoing spam in the same
effective way. They are among the biggest spa
Matt Kettler wrote on Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:59:11 -0400:
> I think it's a brain-dead attempt to counter the image and pdf
> spams that have been so popular lately.
It would be nice if they would block their outgoing spam in the same
effective way. They are among the biggest spam sources for us.
K
At 19:42 23-08-2007, Jonn R Taylor wrote:
OK, but I thought that there was something that one of the RFC's
said about rejecting mail at the smtp level? Also, it looks like
they are rejecting mail, at the smtp level, based on message body too.
There are a lot of people who do that by using Spam
Matt Kettler wrote:
Jonn R Taylor wrote:
OK, but I thought that there was something that one of the RFC's said
about rejecting mail at the smtp level?
Eh?
Also, it looks like they are rejecting mail, at the smtp level, based
on message body too.
That's fine under the RFCs. In fact, the RFC's
Jonn R Taylor wrote:
>
> OK, but I thought that there was something that one of the RFC's said
> about rejecting mail at the smtp level?
Eh?
> Also, it looks like they are rejecting mail, at the smtp level, based
> on message body too.
That's fine under the RFCs. In fact, the RFC's explicitly spec
Matt Kettler wrote:
Jonn R Taylor wrote:
Charters latest for blocking mail. They must block mail that has any
kind of attachments. We have a user that sends her self pdf's to her
home account that is hosted by charter.net. Maybe every one should
just blacklist charter and then maybe they will ge
Jonn R Taylor wrote:
> Charters latest for blocking mail. They must block mail that has any
> kind of attachments. We have a user that sends her self pdf's to her
> home account that is hosted by charter.net. Maybe every one should
> just blacklist charter and then maybe they will get the hint. Any
12 matches
Mail list logo
