On Wed, 04 Nov 2020 18:48:48 -0500 Bill Cole wrote: > On 4 Nov 2020, at 13:31, Thomas Anderson wrote: > > > * 1.8 MISSING_MIMEOLE Message has X-MSMail-Priority, but > > no X-MimeOLE > > In addition to what John noted, that one looks like a candidate for > constructing an exception. MISSING_MIMEOLE already has a number of > exceptions based on the fact that other MUAs have adopted > X-MSMail-Priority but have no reason to use X-MimeOLE because it's a > fundamentally bad idea as a header with no real utility. With a > sample of the headers for the message that hit that rule, we could > add an exception for whatever is generating such messages in this > case. >
it was sent via t-online.de see: https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7306
