On 8/22/07, Noel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/22/07, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's still not clear (at least to me) what you actually want to do and
> > what happens that creates a problem.
> > You provide virus scanning, but not spam scanning? And they reject the
>
On 8/22/07, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's still not clear (at least to me) what you actually want to do and
> what happens that creates a problem.
> You provide virus scanning, but not spam scanning? And they reject the
> "spam" coming from you? Is that what happens?
> Visit them a
It's still not clear (at least to me) what you actually want to do and
what happens that creates a problem.
You provide virus scanning, but not spam scanning? And they reject the
"spam" coming from you? Is that what happens?
Visit them and take a big club with you. It's obviously *completely*
un
On 8/22/07, Kevin Parris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it might be easier if you would simply have a conversation with
> the techy folks at your customers- invite them to configure THEIR system
> so that either everything from YOUR system is OK no matter what spam
> status it has (they can r
I think it might be easier if you would simply have a conversation with
the techy folks at your customers- invite them to configure THEIR system
so that either everything from YOUR system is OK no matter what spam
status it has (they can route it to bit-bucket or whatever) or turn off
the reject-no
On 8/22/07, Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> hi --
>
> What you want is the VBounce ruleset, including in SpamAssassin 3.2.x or
> downloadable for 3.1.x here:
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/VBounceRuleset . It's designed
> to deal with exactly what you're describing.
Yeah I s
hi --
What you want is the VBounce ruleset, including in SpamAssassin 3.2.x or
downloadable for 3.1.x here:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/VBounceRuleset . It's designed
to deal with exactly what you're describing.
--j.
sacoo sacoo writes:
> Well, maybe I didn't explain it properly we are
Well, maybe I didn't explain it properly we are not providing relay for the
outgoing mail, we are only filtering for viruses/spam the incoming mails and
the part that are junk of them are the ones bouncing to us and giving
problems.
Relay service is a non-op in the current spam war. If you
> do
Really the only way to solve this properly is to stop providing relay
service. Relay service is a non-op in the current spam war. If you
do what you are trying to do here, then legitimate bounce messages
will also be dropped and thus you'll be decreasing the quality of
their service. (an
> Hello,
>
> It must been asked before, but I couldn't find any
> suitable, will be glad if you point me somewhere...
> In our company we have the (mailer-exchange ->
> spam-scanner -> customers with their own mail servers)
> topology.
> We relay mail to them but some of them don't have the
> s
Hello,
It must been asked before, but I couldn't find any suitable, will be glad if
you point me somewhere...
In our company we have the (mailer-exchange -> spam-scanner -> customers
with their own mail servers) topology.
We relay mail to them but some of them don't have the spam service with us
a
11 matches
Mail list logo
