Ori,
> > RFC 5321, section 4.4 has a BNF description of a Received: header.
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321#section-4.4
>
> Thank you, although I wonder where the definition of "Protocol"
With = CFWS "WITH" FWS Protocol
Protocol = "ESMTP" / "SMTP" / Attdl-Protocol
On 08/15, Ori Bani wrote:
> I tried to intentionally make a terribly wrong Received to see if SA
> would give me a rule hit but it did not. Is there a rule for this? If
> so, how can I turn it on and off?
I don't think there is actually a rule for unparsable headers. I think it
effectively just i
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:19 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:01:13 -0700
> Ori Bani wrote:
>
>> There are a few changes we want to make to our outgoing email headers,
>> including to the Received headers that our MTA adds. I know that some
>> tools including SA have some tests
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:01:13 -0700
Ori Bani wrote:
> There are a few changes we want to make to our outgoing email headers,
> including to the Received headers that our MTA adds. I know that some
> tools including SA have some tests that judge spamminess based on
> malformed Received headers, but
Hello,
There are a few changes we want to make to our outgoing email headers,
including to the Received headers that our MTA adds. I know that some
tools including SA have some tests that judge spamminess based on
malformed Received headers, but I have not been able to find anywhere
that describes
