RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
I agree. We stay away from posting in the main Smarter Mail forum since the participation seems to be the general or novice user. Add to the fact we preder not to publicly discuss admin type issues. A past dialog with their support about enforcement of admin limits proved to be very frustrating. I found the responses from SmarterMail support depends who is answering the question. A power user group that was restricted or something close to it would be welcome, especially if Bryon Grosz or someone with his experience facilitated the group. A Declude rep would be essential part of the group too. Mike Jaworski -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Doherty Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:58 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding Hi, Matt- I think your analysis is spot-on. They have a lot of naive and relatively naive users on the forums, and they surely get a lot of marginal input from that source. Some of the better companies have a group of power users that they rely on for beta testing and serious input on the product as it evolves. I would hope that they have such a group, although I am not aware of it if they do. -d - Original Message - From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:37 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > Dave, > > I agree, the product is definitely continuing to evolve and they are > pretty good at doing a lot of things, but they aren't good at handling > support issues, especially from power users with an eye for detail. They > didn't get the issues with auth-only port 587 until that exploded on this > list despite repeated requests on their own message board and the fact > that this was not only useful for shutting off unauthenticated access to a > server, but also the standard way of implementing the submission port. > > I think this comes from the fact that they have a lot of control panel > hosting customers using their software, and those users are typically not > tweakers like we are. I don't think that there is a lot of interest on > their part in getting direction from the community as a result of the > general dynamic. I have seen a lot of short-sighted/impractical feature > requests from users on their message list, yet I'm sure that those > requesting such things feel that their requests are just as important as > ours. It's likely hard for them to differentiate, or maybe because of the > typical issues that they see are more on the side of the user that they > don't tend to think so deeply about this stuff. It sound like they really > didn't understand the nature of this bug and assumed it was a user error, > or didn't bother to read deeply enough into the unintended affects. > > What you and Gary have done however seems like the best way to > approach > it. Sort of like yelling to get attention, but yelling detail and being > persistent instead of just getting angry and spouting obscenities. I > would understand them not fixing it immediately if it is complicated for > them to do so, which it may be, but I wouldn't understand a conscious > decision to leave things as is indefinitely. > > Matt > > --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
The implication from reading what little was said about their beta testing on their forums (they were very tight lipped about it), is that it was done by SmarterTools' hosting provider crystaltech.com. I presume that the two companies have some type of close relationship, both from a business sense and a geographical one. Original Message > From: "Dave Doherty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:59 PM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > Hi, Matt- > > I think your analysis is spot-on. They have a lot of naive and relatively > naive users on the forums, and they surely get a lot of marginal input from > that source. Some of the better companies have a group of power users that > they rely on for beta testing and serious input on the product as it > evolves. I would hope that they have such a group, although I am not aware > of it if they do. > > -d > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:37 PM > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > > > Dave, > > > > I agree, the product is definitely continuing to evolve and they are > > pretty good at doing a lot of things, but they aren't good at handling > > support issues, especially from power users with an eye for detail. They > > didn't get the issues with auth-only port 587 until that exploded on this > > list despite repeated requests on their own message board and the fact > > that this was not only useful for shutting off unauthenticated access to a > > server, but also the standard way of implementing the submission port. > > > > I think this comes from the fact that they have a lot of control panel > > hosting customers using their software, and those users are typically not > > tweakers like we are. I don't think that there is a lot of interest on > > their part in getting direction from the community as a result of the > > general dynamic. I have seen a lot of short-sighted/impractical feature > > requests from users on their message list, yet I'm sure that those > > requesting such things feel that their requests are just as important as > > ours. It's likely hard for them to differentiate, or maybe because of the > > typical issues that they see are more on the side of the user that they > > don't tend to think so deeply about this stuff. It sound like they really > > didn't understand the nature of this bug and assumed it was a user error, > > or didn't bother to read deeply enough into the unintended affects. > > > > What you and Gary have done however seems like the best way to approach > > it. Sort of like yelling to get attention, but yelling detail and being > > persistent instead of just getting angry and spouting obscenities. I > > would understand them not fixing it immediately if it is complicated for > > them to do so, which it may be, but I wouldn't understand a conscious > > decision to leave things as is indefinitely. > > > > Matt > > > > --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
Hi, Matt- I think your analysis is spot-on. They have a lot of naive and relatively naive users on the forums, and they surely get a lot of marginal input from that source. Some of the better companies have a group of power users that they rely on for beta testing and serious input on the product as it evolves. I would hope that they have such a group, although I am not aware of it if they do. -d - Original Message - From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:37 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding Dave, I agree, the product is definitely continuing to evolve and they are pretty good at doing a lot of things, but they aren't good at handling support issues, especially from power users with an eye for detail. They didn't get the issues with auth-only port 587 until that exploded on this list despite repeated requests on their own message board and the fact that this was not only useful for shutting off unauthenticated access to a server, but also the standard way of implementing the submission port. I think this comes from the fact that they have a lot of control panel hosting customers using their software, and those users are typically not tweakers like we are. I don't think that there is a lot of interest on their part in getting direction from the community as a result of the general dynamic. I have seen a lot of short-sighted/impractical feature requests from users on their message list, yet I'm sure that those requesting such things feel that their requests are just as important as ours. It's likely hard for them to differentiate, or maybe because of the typical issues that they see are more on the side of the user that they don't tend to think so deeply about this stuff. It sound like they really didn't understand the nature of this bug and assumed it was a user error, or didn't bother to read deeply enough into the unintended affects. What you and Gary have done however seems like the best way to approach it. Sort of like yelling to get attention, but yelling detail and being persistent instead of just getting angry and spouting obscenities. I would understand them not fixing it immediately if it is complicated for them to do so, which it may be, but I wouldn't understand a conscious decision to leave things as is indefinitely. Matt --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
Dave, I agree, the product is definitely continuing to evolve and they are pretty good at doing a lot of things, but they aren't good at handling support issues, especially from power users with an eye for detail. They didn't get the issues with auth-only port 587 until that exploded on this list despite repeated requests on their own message board and the fact that this was not only useful for shutting off unauthenticated access to a server, but also the standard way of implementing the submission port. I think this comes from the fact that they have a lot of control panel hosting customers using their software, and those users are typically not tweakers like we are. I don't think that there is a lot of interest on their part in getting direction from the community as a result of the general dynamic. I have seen a lot of short-sighted/impractical feature requests from users on their message list, yet I'm sure that those requesting such things feel that their requests are just as important as ours. It's likely hard for them to differentiate, or maybe because of the typical issues that they see are more on the side of the user that they don't tend to think so deeply about this stuff. It sound like they really didn't understand the nature of this bug and assumed it was a user error, or didn't bother to read deeply enough into the unintended affects. What you and Gary have done however seems like the best way to approach it. Sort of like yelling to get attention, but yelling detail and being persistent instead of just getting angry and spouting obscenities. I would understand them not fixing it immediately if it is complicated for them to do so, which it may be, but I wouldn't understand a conscious decision to leave things as is indefinitely. Matt Dave Doherty wrote: I have had similar experiences with them right back to the beginning. I think the quality of the service you get varies greatly with the individual. If they "get it" the response is usually pretty good. It does not always seem easy to get them to "get it" though... I held off deploying SM in my plant for over a year because I wanted to see how the product would evolve. I was - and remain - very impressed with V3 overall. Every complicated product is going to have some issues, the real issue is how they respond when the product meets the users abnd the trouble tickets start flying. I just submitted a detailed ticket with screenshots and a good explanation as to why I think this is a major issue. It will be very interesting to see what kind of response I get. -Dave Doherty Skywaves, Inc. - Original Message - From: "Gary Steiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding Matt, I tried all that... --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
I have had similar experiences with them right back to the beginning. I think the quality of the service you get varies greatly with the individual. If they "get it" the response is usually pretty good. It does not always seem easy to get them to "get it" though... I held off deploying SM in my plant for over a year because I wanted to see how the product would evolve. I was - and remain - very impressed with V3 overall. Every complicated product is going to have some issues, the real issue is how they respond when the product meets the users abnd the trouble tickets start flying. I just submitted a detailed ticket with screenshots and a good explanation as to why I think this is a major issue. It will be very interesting to see what kind of response I get. -Dave Doherty Skywaves, Inc. - Original Message - From: "Gary Steiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding Matt, I tried all that... --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
Matt, I tried all that. It seemed like they didn't want to listen, or that the whole concept was just foreign to them. It's like the support people are multitasking and are unwilling to take the time to properly listen to the customer and dissect the problem. I've had very strange results dealing with their support. One day I get the perfect response to my questions, and the next day it is like I am talking to someone on another planet. Maybe their focus has changed somewhat as well. Their online forums used to be very useful. They were very well organized, and the support people participated on a daily basis. Around the time that 3.0 came out they changed the organization of their forums, lumping a lot of separate secitons together. Now you get the newbie user questions mixed together with the questions from server administrators. Also, it seems that over the past two weeks the support people have stopped posting on the forums altogether, the only ones posting now are the users. If this is an indication of a major policy shift on their part, this does not bode well for the future. Which is a shame considering that SmarterMail seems to be taking off as a product. Deja vu all over again. I've been going over another problem with them regarding Yahoo Groups. For some reason mail sent from SmarterMail to Yahoo Groups gets bounced by Yahoo as a 554 error stating that the message was sent as a BCC (which it most definitely was not). When I talked to Yahoo, they said it was a SmarterMail problem, and of course, SmarterMail insisted it was a Yahoo problem. Everyone is ready to wash their hands of the problem rather than try to get it solved. Sorry if I've gone off on a rant, but both of these problems seem to me to be indicative of potentially significant bugs, but I can't seem to get that message across. Gary Original Message > From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > Gary, > > I've had some issues getting them past the part where they assume "user > error" or something else that is outside of their immediate control so > that they can actually look at the issue at hand. It may be just simply > an issue of them not listening/reading carefully enough. > > All I can say is that you might want to go back to square one and > re-explain the issue. I think that Kevin made the essence of that clear > in his reply, but I would then add to it the unfortunate issues that can > result from displaying plain text as HTML, and suggest that if they are > displaying a plain/text only message, to do some bracket replacement in > order to keep plain/text elements from becoming functional in the HTML view. > > Showing a message that is plain/text as HTML is fine just so long as > they replace the brackets. > > Matt > > > > Gary Steiner wrote: > > >I can't get SmarterTools to see this as a bug. Their answer is that their > >web mail is set to HTML by default, and you should just click on the "plain > >text" link to view it. Their support doesn't seem to be able to grasp the > >wider implications of this problem. > > > >Gary > > > > > > Original Message > > > > > >>From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:31 PM > >>To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > >>Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > >> > >>That's surely a bug. Dave sent his message as plain/text and > >>SmarterMail should be replacing the brackets with HTML encoding before > >>displaying it as HTML so that it should not be a functional element when > >>displayed., i.e. > >> > >>; > >> > >>If Dave had sent it as an HTML message, his client would have done the > >>replacement for him. > >> > >>This should probably be reported to SmarterMail. There are a lot of > >>potential consequences, for instance, virus scanners won't generally > >>consider code in plain/text segments to be executable, yet it can be in > >>SmarterMail webmail if it is working the way that you reported. > >> > >>Matt > >> > >> > >> > >>Gary Steiner wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>It is interesting how SmarterMail's web mail interprets Dave's message. > >>>It sees the META statement in his message as embedded code, and runs it > >>>when I read the message. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>--- > >>This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > >>unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > >>type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > >>at http://www.mail-archive.com. > >> > >> > > > > > > > >--- > >This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > >unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > >type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found >
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
Gary, I've had some issues getting them past the part where they assume "user error" or something else that is outside of their immediate control so that they can actually look at the issue at hand. It may be just simply an issue of them not listening/reading carefully enough. All I can say is that you might want to go back to square one and re-explain the issue. I think that Kevin made the essence of that clear in his reply, but I would then add to it the unfortunate issues that can result from displaying plain text as HTML, and suggest that if they are displaying a plain/text only message, to do some bracket replacement in order to keep plain/text elements from becoming functional in the HTML view. Showing a message that is plain/text as HTML is fine just so long as they replace the brackets. Matt Gary Steiner wrote: I can't get SmarterTools to see this as a bug. Their answer is that their web mail is set to HTML by default, and you should just click on the "plain text" link to view it. Their support doesn't seem to be able to grasp the wider implications of this problem. Gary Original Message From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:31 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding That's surely a bug. Dave sent his message as plain/text and SmarterMail should be replacing the brackets with HTML encoding before displaying it as HTML so that it should not be a functional element when displayed., i.e. http://www.mydomain.com"> If Dave had sent it as an HTML message, his client would have done the replacement for him. This should probably be reported to SmarterMail. There are a lot of potential consequences, for instance, virus scanners won't generally consider code in plain/text segments to be executable, yet it can be in SmarterMail webmail if it is working the way that you reported. Matt Gary Steiner wrote: It is interesting how SmarterMail's web mail interprets Dave's message. It sees the META statement in his message as embedded code, and runs it when I read the message. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Inexpensive rate limiting switch?
Dave, We have been using Compex switchs at end users locations with very good luck (vlan trucking and bandwidth control). I ask the regional rep if they had a switch made for your need his answer is below. Priced well under $200 for isps. If you want his contact number email off list, they have price for isps. Yes. What he wants is the SXP2224WM. It has bandwidth control and port priority. Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tim Moore Technical Manager Sisna of Spokane and Northern Idaho Suite 217 Lilac Flag Bldg. 104 S Freya ST. Spokane WA, 99202 Work: 509-535-1169 EXT 18 or 1-888-824-9781 EXT 18 Fax: 509-636-0122 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Doherty Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Inexpensive rate limiting switch? Hi, all- I'll be providing VOIP and Internet service to five to ten other tenants in the building I will be moving into in a couple of months. I'm looking for a way to provide limited bandwidth to each port, preferably with some form of QOS or priority handling for the VOIP services. Does anybody know of an inexpensive way to provide this? These are one to three person companies for the most part, and big-bucks solutions are not in the picture. -Dave Doherty Skywaves, Inc. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [Certified Virus free by ASISNA Mail Services.www.asisna.com ] --- [Certified Virus free by ASISNA Mail Services.www.asisna.com ] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: HTML Execution (was port forwarding)
I just checked it again. The message is plain text. The default display in SM is HTML. If you select plain text, the tag shows up fine. If you select HTML, the tag disappears from view and the refresh occurs. I placed the code in the body of a standard HTML page on my website, and the refresh occurred. So I was incorrect in my assumption that the refresh directive had to be in the header of the page. Apparently, it can be anywhere. This could lead to some mischief, I'm afraid. -Dave Doherty Skywaves, Inc. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
Then I would suggest making a feature enhance ment to SmarterTools. "If a message has not HTML part then default to displaying the plain text." It sounds to me that SmarterMail defaults to an HTML view of a message. They do not see this as a bug so it must be a feature!! Kevin Bilbee > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dave Doherty > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:52 AM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > > Hi Kevin- > > My original message was text-only. I just checked to be sure. > > -d > > - Original Message - > From: "Kevin Bilbee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 1:35 PM > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > > > This is a bug SmarterMail they need to do the replacements when > displaying > > a > > plaintext email. Or switch the view automatically if there is only a > > plaintext portion of the email. > > > > Does the origional email have a plaintext and html portion??? > > > > > > If it does and the HTML portion is blank then they are doing what many > > clients would do. Default to the HTML view. They also may be using poor > > judgment and assuming that no one would ever discuss HTML tags > in a plain > > text email and not parsing them. > > > > > > > > Kevin Bilbee > > > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gary Steiner > >> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:47 AM > >> To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > >> Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > >> > >> > >> I can't get SmarterTools to see this as a bug. Their answer is > >> that their web mail is set to HTML by default, and you should > >> just click on the "plain text" link to view it. Their support > >> doesn't seem to be able to grasp the wider implications of > this problem. > >> > >> Gary > >> > >> > >> Original Message > >> > From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:31 PM > >> > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > >> > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > >> > > >> > That's surely a bug. Dave sent his message as plain/text and > >> > SmarterMail should be replacing the brackets with HTML > encoding before > >> > displaying it as HTML so that it should not be a functional > >> element when > >> > displayed., i.e. > >> > > >> > ; > >> > > >> > If Dave had sent it as an HTML message, his client would > have done the > >> > replacement for him. > >> > > >> > This should probably be reported to SmarterMail. There are a lot of > >> > potential consequences, for instance, virus scanners won't generally > >> > consider code in plain/text segments to be executable, yet > it can be in > >> > SmarterMail webmail if it is working the way that you reported. > >> > > >> > Matt > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Gary Steiner wrote: > >> > > >> > >It is interesting how SmarterMail's web mail interprets Dave's > >> message. It sees the META statement in his message as embedded > >> code, and runs it when I read the message. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > --- > >> > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > >> > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > >> > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > >> > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > >> > >> > >> > >> --- > >> This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > >> unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > >> type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > >> at http://www.mail-archive.com. > >> > > > > --- > > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > > > > > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
Hi Kevin- My original message was text-only. I just checked to be sure. -d - Original Message - From: "Kevin Bilbee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 1:35 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding This is a bug SmarterMail they need to do the replacements when displaying a plaintext email. Or switch the view automatically if there is only a plaintext portion of the email. Does the origional email have a plaintext and html portion??? If it does and the HTML portion is blank then they are doing what many clients would do. Default to the HTML view. They also may be using poor judgment and assuming that no one would ever discuss HTML tags in a plain text email and not parsing them. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gary Steiner Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:47 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding I can't get SmarterTools to see this as a bug. Their answer is that their web mail is set to HTML by default, and you should just click on the "plain text" link to view it. Their support doesn't seem to be able to grasp the wider implications of this problem. Gary Original Message > From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:31 PM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > That's surely a bug. Dave sent his message as plain/text and > SmarterMail should be replacing the brackets with HTML encoding before > displaying it as HTML so that it should not be a functional element when > displayed., i.e. > > ; > > If Dave had sent it as an HTML message, his client would have done the > replacement for him. > > This should probably be reported to SmarterMail. There are a lot of > potential consequences, for instance, virus scanners won't generally > consider code in plain/text segments to be executable, yet it can be in > SmarterMail webmail if it is working the way that you reported. > > Matt > > > > Gary Steiner wrote: > > >It is interesting how SmarterMail's web mail interprets Dave's message. It sees the META statement in his message as embedded code, and runs it when I read the message. > > > > > > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
The original message had no HTML part. You probably have a copy of it, it was Dave Doherty's message to this list dated "Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:49:42 -0500" with a subject line of "Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding". SmarterMail's web mail interpreted the META tag Dave illustrated in his message as HTML. Original Message > From: "Kevin Bilbee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 1:36 PM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > This is a bug SmarterMail they need to do the replacements when displaying a > plaintext email. Or switch the view automatically if there is only a > plaintext portion of the email. > > Does the origional email have a plaintext and html portion??? > > > If it does and the HTML portion is blank then they are doing what many > clients would do. Default to the HTML view. They also may be using poor > judgment and assuming that no one would ever discuss HTML tags in a plain > text email and not parsing them. > > > > Kevin Bilbee > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gary Steiner > > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:47 AM > > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > > > > > I can't get SmarterTools to see this as a bug. Their answer is > > that their web mail is set to HTML by default, and you should > > just click on the "plain text" link to view it. Their support > > doesn't seem to be able to grasp the wider implications of this problem. > > > > Gary > > > > > > Original Message > > > From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:31 PM > > > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > > > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > > > > > That's surely a bug. Dave sent his message as plain/text and > > > SmarterMail should be replacing the brackets with HTML encoding before > > > displaying it as HTML so that it should not be a functional > > element when > > > displayed., i.e. > > > > > > ; > > > > > > If Dave had sent it as an HTML message, his client would have done the > > > replacement for him. > > > > > > This should probably be reported to SmarterMail. There are a lot of > > > potential consequences, for instance, virus scanners won't generally > > > consider code in plain/text segments to be executable, yet it can be in > > > SmarterMail webmail if it is working the way that you reported. > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > > > > > Gary Steiner wrote: > > > > > > >It is interesting how SmarterMail's web mail interprets Dave's > > message. It sees the META statement in his message as embedded > > code, and runs it when I read the message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation
We are currently working on a SmarterMail version of iPlus Info Browser and have been researching the SmarterMail webservices rather extensively. We should be able to write you a tool to do bulk imports of users into SmarterMail. If you are interested, please contact me off list.Thanks,Evans Martin From: Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 1:08 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation No import. Brand New box. They are migrating from a Open Source MailSolution to Windows 2003/SmarterMail. I'm assuming we'll have to enterevery user by hand.I'm trying to get a feel for how much time I should reasonably quote.When I say reasonable, I mean that I don't want to bill the client forour learning curve and RTFM time.Thursday, March 23, 2006, 12:13:12 PM, Dave Doherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:DD> Are you importing from an IMail installation? My experience with that wasDD> very good, except they forgot to do the domain aliases. I didn't try DD> autoresponders, but that should be minimal. It brought over all the mail asDD> well.DD> Most of the time I spent on the project was in configruing add-ons likeDD> Declude, Sniffer, inv-uribl, etc., not the main product.DD> Installation of the product itself is pretty straightforward. I read theDD> forum posts and decided that, even though I didn't like the paths theyDD> chose, I should accept the defaults. It seems that most of the people whoDD> were having really odd problems were using different paths. Having saidDD> that, all the path-problem type posts I saw were with V2 and the current V3DD> should be a lot better.DD> As an example, the product installs in "c:\program DD> files\smartertools\smartermail" where I would much rather have it in DD> "c:\smartermail" to make it easier to get to.DD> One word of caution: there appear to be oddball problems with the alternateDD> "skins," which are really just color schemes. Conventional wisdom on theDD> forums seems to be "just use the default skin"...DD> -Dave DohertyDD> Skywaves, Inc.DD> - Original Message - DD> From: "Don Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>DD> To: DD> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 12:42 PMDD> Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation>> We've been asked to estimate/quote an installation of SmarterMail,>> which we've not actually installed before. There are 4 domains with fixed IP addresses, 64 POP boxes & WebMail>> and 5 two-three sentence auto-responders. For those of you who have been through it before, could you give me an>> idea of how much time you feel is reasonable, not including our own>> RTFM and learning curve time. Thanks,>> >> Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inetconcepts.net>> (972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049>> --->> This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To>> unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and>> type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found>> at http://www.mail-archive.com.>> DD> ---DD> This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. ToDD> unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andDD> type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be foundDD> at http://www.mail-archive.com.Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inetconcepts.net(972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049---This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com.---[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation
No import. Brand New box. They are migrating from a Open Source Mail Solution to Windows 2003/SmarterMail. I'm assuming we'll have to enter every user by hand. I'm trying to get a feel for how much time I should reasonably quote. When I say reasonable, I mean that I don't want to bill the client for our learning curve and RTFM time. Thursday, March 23, 2006, 12:13:12 PM, Dave Doherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: DD> Are you importing from an IMail installation? My experience with that was DD> very good, except they forgot to do the domain aliases. I didn't try DD> autoresponders, but that should be minimal. It brought over all the mail as DD> well. DD> Most of the time I spent on the project was in configruing add-ons like DD> Declude, Sniffer, inv-uribl, etc., not the main product. DD> Installation of the product itself is pretty straightforward. I read the DD> forum posts and decided that, even though I didn't like the paths they DD> chose, I should accept the defaults. It seems that most of the people who DD> were having really odd problems were using different paths. Having said DD> that, all the path-problem type posts I saw were with V2 and the current V3 DD> should be a lot better. DD> As an example, the product installs in "c:\program DD> files\smartertools\smartermail" where I would much rather have it in DD> "c:\smartermail" to make it easier to get to. DD> One word of caution: there appear to be oddball problems with the alternate DD> "skins," which are really just color schemes. Conventional wisdom on the DD> forums seems to be "just use the default skin"... DD> -Dave Doherty DD> Skywaves, Inc. DD> - Original Message - DD> From: "Don Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DD> To: DD> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 12:42 PM DD> Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation >> We've been asked to estimate/quote an installation of SmarterMail, >> which we've not actually installed before. >> >> There are 4 domains with fixed IP addresses, 64 POP boxes & WebMail >> and 5 two-three sentence auto-responders. >> >> For those of you who have been through it before, could you give me an >> idea of how much time you feel is reasonable, not including our own >> RTFM and learning curve time. >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc. >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inetconcepts.net >> (972) 788-2364Fax: (972) 788-5049 >> >> >> --- >> This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To >> unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and >> type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found >> at http://www.mail-archive.com. >> DD> --- DD> This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To DD> unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and DD> type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found DD> at http://www.mail-archive.com. Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inetconcepts.net (972) 788-2364Fax: (972) 788-5049 --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation
Here my two cents: 15 Min: Agree and make sure on where to install (d or c), where the domains info and emails are going to held at (d: c:, network), where the spool and logs are going to be held etc 15 Min (optional): coordinating everything in your mind and on paper to make sure all steps are clear before starting setup 5 Minutes: Run setup (smartermail) 5-10 Minutes: Setup IIS to run smartermail webmail, check if it works, etc, and activate license 30 - 60 Minutes: to make tests using MX of a real domain and make sure everything is working -inbound and outbound- 30 to 120 minutes aprox: installing external components if needed. 30 Minutes: migrating or adding the domains. If it is a migration with migrating tools provided by smartertools that should be an easy task. 30 to 90 minutes (optional): adding by hand 64 POP mail boxes if you are not using a migration tool and setting up Autoresponders. Another 30 to 60 minutes double checking everything in the production environment and making adjustments if needed. Total Minimum 2 hours and 30 minutes, probably less. Maximum (reasonable) 6 hours Plus the time RTFM and learning curve regards Luis Arango > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Brown > Sent: Jueves, 23 de Marzo de 2006 12:42 p.m. > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation > > We've been asked to estimate/quote an installation of > SmarterMail, which we've not actually installed before. > > There are 4 domains with fixed IP addresses, 64 POP boxes & > WebMail and 5 two-three sentence auto-responders. > > For those of you who have been through it before, could you > give me an idea of how much time you feel is reasonable, not > including our own RTFM and learning curve time. > > Thanks, > > > > Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inetconcepts.net > (972) 788-2364Fax: (972) 788-5049 > > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be > found at http://www.mail-archive.com. > __ > [Email scanned for viruses] > [Email escaneado contra virus] > __ [Email scanned for viruses] [Email escaneado contra virus] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
This is a bug SmarterMail they need to do the replacements when displaying a plaintext email. Or switch the view automatically if there is only a plaintext portion of the email. Does the origional email have a plaintext and html portion??? If it does and the HTML portion is blank then they are doing what many clients would do. Default to the HTML view. They also may be using poor judgment and assuming that no one would ever discuss HTML tags in a plain text email and not parsing them. Kevin Bilbee > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gary Steiner > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:47 AM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > > I can't get SmarterTools to see this as a bug. Their answer is > that their web mail is set to HTML by default, and you should > just click on the "plain text" link to view it. Their support > doesn't seem to be able to grasp the wider implications of this problem. > > Gary > > > Original Message > > From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:31 PM > > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > > > That's surely a bug. Dave sent his message as plain/text and > > SmarterMail should be replacing the brackets with HTML encoding before > > displaying it as HTML so that it should not be a functional > element when > > displayed., i.e. > > > > ; > > > > If Dave had sent it as an HTML message, his client would have done the > > replacement for him. > > > > This should probably be reported to SmarterMail. There are a lot of > > potential consequences, for instance, virus scanners won't generally > > consider code in plain/text segments to be executable, yet it can be in > > SmarterMail webmail if it is working the way that you reported. > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > Gary Steiner wrote: > > > > >It is interesting how SmarterMail's web mail interprets Dave's > message. It sees the META statement in his message as embedded > code, and runs it when I read the message. > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > > > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] [OT] Drop Connection On First Invalid User
On Mar 23, 2006, at 12:55 PM, Darrell (([EMAIL PROTECTED])) wrote: Is anyone dropping the smtp connection on the first invalid user? Anyone see a downside to this? If the message has multiple recipients (even ones that are valid) they will receive a notice saying the message was not delivered. Thoughts? We drop after the second invalid user. One could be an accident, two is a pattern. We had over 14,000 invalid users attempts yesterday from 216.79.155.*. Imail SMTP access control list today for that subnet. If the "denied" numbers are big during the next few days, blockage at our main router is the next/final step. Thanks, Greg Evanitsky ACS, Inc. (717) 248-2720 ext. 5113 --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation
Are you importing from an IMail installation? My experience with that was very good, except they forgot to do the domain aliases. I didn't try autoresponders, but that should be minimal. It brought over all the mail as well. Most of the time I spent on the project was in configruing add-ons like Declude, Sniffer, inv-uribl, etc., not the main product. Installation of the product itself is pretty straightforward. I read the forum posts and decided that, even though I didn't like the paths they chose, I should accept the defaults. It seems that most of the people who were having really odd problems were using different paths. Having said that, all the path-problem type posts I saw were with V2 and the current V3 should be a lot better. As an example, the product installs in "c:\program files\smartertools\smartermail" where I would much rather have it in "c:\smartermail" to make it easier to get to. One word of caution: there appear to be oddball problems with the alternate "skins," which are really just color schemes. Conventional wisdom on the forums seems to be "just use the default skin"... -Dave Doherty Skywaves, Inc. - Original Message - From: "Don Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 12:42 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation We've been asked to estimate/quote an installation of SmarterMail, which we've not actually installed before. There are 4 domains with fixed IP addresses, 64 POP boxes & WebMail and 5 two-three sentence auto-responders. For those of you who have been through it before, could you give me an idea of how much time you feel is reasonable, not including our own RTFM and learning curve time. Thanks, Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inetconcepts.net (972) 788-2364Fax: (972) 788-5049 --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] [OT] Drop Connection On First Invalid User
Is anyone dropping the smtp connection on the first invalid user? Anyone see a downside to this? If the message has multiple recipients (even ones that are valid) they will receive a notice saying the message was not delivered. Thoughts? Darrell --- Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude, Imail, mxGuard, and ORF. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] OT Smarter Mail Installation
We've been asked to estimate/quote an installation of SmarterMail, which we've not actually installed before. There are 4 domains with fixed IP addresses, 64 POP boxes & WebMail and 5 two-three sentence auto-responders. For those of you who have been through it before, could you give me an idea of how much time you feel is reasonable, not including our own RTFM and learning curve time. Thanks, Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inetconcepts.net (972) 788-2364Fax: (972) 788-5049 --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
I can't get SmarterTools to see this as a bug. Their answer is that their web mail is set to HTML by default, and you should just click on the "plain text" link to view it. Their support doesn't seem to be able to grasp the wider implications of this problem. Gary Original Message > From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:31 PM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > That's surely a bug. Dave sent his message as plain/text and > SmarterMail should be replacing the brackets with HTML encoding before > displaying it as HTML so that it should not be a functional element when > displayed., i.e. > > ; > > If Dave had sent it as an HTML message, his client would have done the > replacement for him. > > This should probably be reported to SmarterMail. There are a lot of > potential consequences, for instance, virus scanners won't generally > consider code in plain/text segments to be executable, yet it can be in > SmarterMail webmail if it is working the way that you reported. > > Matt > > > > Gary Steiner wrote: > > >It is interesting how SmarterMail's web mail interprets Dave's message. It > >sees the META statement in his message as embedded code, and runs it when I > >read the message. > > > > > > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] SMTP Server for IMail popups
I am unsure what changed, it could have been an Imail update or a windows update, or maybe declude, but I now constantly get a popup stating "SMTP Server for Imail. Encountered a problem and needed to close." szAppName: SMTPd32.exe szAppVer: 5.11.30.0 szModName: ntdll.dll szModVer: 5.2.3790.1830 offset: 0004cd7d This error occurs constantly. If I close the popup, it will reappear a few seconds later. The mail server itself is running just fine and the smtp service doesn't show any indication of being stopped. The event viewer show an applicationg error: Event ID: 1004 Description: Reporting queued error: faulting application SMTPd32.exe, version 5.11.30.0, faulting module ntdll.dll, version 5.2.3790.1830, fault address 0x0004ca01. Oddly enough, this only happens when I am logged into the server. Windows 2003 SP1 Imail 8.22 Declude 3.0.5.22 Any ideas? Will --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Inexpensive rate limiting switch?
Hi Dave, I have one of these that will do what you want I believe. - I've moved on to a Packeteer and a large Catalyst. If you are interested let me know. http://www.netsys-direct.com/proddetail.php?prod=NS-2024S&cat=12 -Nick Dave Doherty wrote: Hi, all- I'll be providing VOIP and Internet service to five to ten other tenants in the building I will be moving into in a couple of months. I'm looking for a way to provide limited bandwidth to each port, preferably with some form of QOS or priority handling for the VOIP services. Does anybody know of an inexpensive way to provide this? These are one to three person companies for the most part, and big-bucks solutions are not in the picture. -Dave Doherty Skywaves, Inc. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Going to junk in Hotmail/ Validating the IP??
Sandy, Thanks for the reply. But if I changed the name to mail.prudentialrand.com - wouldn't that cause any other domain name on the server to fail a HELO-PTR-A roundtrip test? If you don't mind, what would you need to see in the logs and or headers to see if there is an issue? Up until now I thought I was RFC compliant and my server was setup OK Marc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:05 PM To: Marc Catuogno Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Going to junk in Hotmail/ Validating the IP?? > Has anyone ever heard of "validating the IP" from the mail client to > the server? It's very unlikely that this has anything to do with the initial submission from MUA to your SMTP server. Rather, the fact that your server is HELOing as mail.prudentialrand.com, although its canonical name is la01prudmail01.myrient.net, will cause your mail to fail a HELO-PTR-A "roundtrip" test. The exact text of the error message also implies that your return-path (envelope MAIL FROM:) does not match your header From: value. I don't know if that's actually true; have to see a log to know. --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/release / Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/downloa d/release/ http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/download/re lease/ --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
