[Declude.JunkMail] Imail recommendations (OT)
Sorry if this is OT, but we are about to replace our NT4 mail server and I am looking for a quick recommendation. We have Imail V 8.0, but no current support agreement from Ipswitch. Question: Is the upgrade to 8.2 worth the $695 for a support agreement? Why? Additional info: ~20 domains ~500 users Not expecting a lot in the way of growth Current Declude JM+AV user (not yet on the 2.x series) Also using Sniffer Thanks for the feedback. David --- 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] Imail recommendations (OT)
Points well taken. We really have more of a hardware/software support issue than anything else. Declude's latest version doesn't have installation options for NT4 other than a note to call support (not to mention that NT4 as an OS isn't even supported anymore). Additionally, we are having some issues with the RAID controller on our mail server. It will probably take less effort/downtime to replace the box (with other available hardware we have on hand) than to fix the problem. This server has been happily scanning and hosting email for 6+ years now with no major problems until now. If we get half that lifespan out of the next box we'll be more than happy. Email hosting is more of a way for our networking clients to have a one-stop shop than it is a money maker. Thanks for your input. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 4:35 PM To: David Fletcher Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail recommendations (OT) Not expecting a lot in the way of growth That's really the key. You're sort of saying I'm perfectly satisfied. Am I satisfied? This is why gathering (or even manufacturing) a true requirements document is crucial to the evaluation process. If the current system matches the current requirements (_current_ requirements do include planning in the present for future growth or other changes) in the areas of performance, features, stability, and security, and you're not tryiing for a tax writeoff, why bother upgrading? 8.2 legitimately boasts a better SMTPD engine in both performance and features, but these will not be noticeable if everyone's already content. Just upgrading the server disk hardware may give you user-facing improvements. --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/rel ease/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/dow nload/release/ http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/downloa d/release/ --- 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: Attachment sizes
We have never set message size limits on our servers. Now it is becoming an issue. Is there any sort of standard for maximum message sizes? This is for hosted customers and I'd like to be reasonable, but I don't think allowing them to receive 18meg + messages is necessary. (I just shook my head when I saw this one after hearing the question: Why is my Outlook locking up?) What limits do you all use? Thanks for the input. David Fletcher InfoTech International, LLC. (904)338-9234 -- Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.] --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] Bogus Date header
I am trying to help out the admin of another server by showing him results from Declude here on our server. I am unclear as to what's wrong with the Date: header below. I suspect that it was added by Imail. The bad header lookup at Declude.com lists it as a bogus Date: header. If Imail added it shouldn't it be listed as a missing Date: header instead of a bogus one? What am I missing? (XXX's added by me) Received: from by firstcoastmail.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A1825C6E0102; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:17:06 -0400 Received: from XXX by X via csmap id fb66b594_e0b1_11d8_8648_00304824a5c7_16592; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:20:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: from XXX by with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2657.72) id NM2L8MRV; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:17:04 -0500 Received: from XXX by X (IBM MVS SMTP CS V1R2) with BSMTP id 7868; Wed, 28 Jul 04 11:17:51 CDT TO: XXX FROM: SUBJECT: 09-A-10Q602 V2 MATERIAL DAMAGE APPRAISAL MIME-VERSION: 1.0; CONTENT-TYPE: TEXT/HTML; CHARSET=US-ASCII Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-RBL-Warning: BADHEADERS: This E-mail was sent from a broken mail client [c020020c]. X-RBL-Warning: HELOBOGUS: Domain has no MX or A records [0301]. X-RBL-Warning: SPAMHEADERS: This E-mail has headers consistent with spam [c020020c]. X-Declude-Sender: X-Declude-Spoolname: Dd1825c6e010245a8.SMD X-Note: X-Note: This message was scanned for Spam X-Test-Failed: BADHEADERS, HELOBOGUS, SPAMHEADERS, GIBBERISH, WEIGHT4, CATCHALLMAILS X-Note: Total spam weight of this E-mail is 20. X-Note: Recipient Host:XX X-Note: Sender Address:XX X-Note: Sender Host Name: XXX X-Note: Sender IP Address: X X-Note: Sender Country ID: X-Note: Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:17:12 -0400 X-RCPT-TO: XXX Status: R X-UIDL: 390996653 David Fletcher InfoTech International, LLC. (904)338-9234 -- Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.] --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] Bogus Date header
Thanks. I just wanted to be sure. -Original Message- From: R. Scott Perry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 3:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Bogus Date header I am trying to help out the admin of another server by showing him results from Declude here on our server. I am unclear as to what's wrong with the Date: header below. I suspect that it was added by Imail. That is exactly the problem. Since it was added by IMail, it means that there was no Date: header when the E-mail was received. -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers since 2000. Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection. Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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 was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] spamcop?
Has spamcop stopped working? I'm not seeing any reference to it in my logs now (set to mid) or headers. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] spamcop?
Good call, Scott. I don't think any of these tests are showing up right now. I'm going to bump up the logging and take a better look. OSSRC ip4rrelays.osirusoft.com127.0.0.4 16 0 SPAMCOP ip4rbl.spamcop.net 127.0.0.2 16 0 JAPAN ip4rjapan.blackholes.us 127.0.0.2 18 0 MONKEYFORMMAIL ip4rformmail.relays.monkeys.com * 16 0 MONKEYPROXIES ip4rproxies.relays.monkeys.com * 16 0 -Original Message- From: R. Scott Perry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 12:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] spamcop? Has spamcop stopped working? I'm not seeing any reference to it in my logs now (set to mid) or headers. It still seems to be working fine from here (see http://www.declude.com/spamtrap.htm ). Could you post the longer line that begins with SPAMCOP from your \IMail\Declude\global.cfg file? Are E-mails failing other IP-based spam tests? -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers. Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection. Find out what you have been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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 was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] spamcop?
More info: Debug gives me these lines: 07/07/2003 13:10:54 Qa9930eca013e736e Test 1-SPAMCOP didn't get a response. 07/07/2003 13:10:54 Qa9930eca013e736e Test 2-JAPAN didn't get a response. 07/07/2003 13:10:54 Qa9930eca013e736e Test 3-MONKEYFORMMAIL didn't get a response. 07/07/2003 13:10:54 Qa9930eca013e736e Test 4-MONKEYPROXIES didn't get a response. -Original Message- From: R. Scott Perry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 12:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] spamcop? Has spamcop stopped working? I'm not seeing any reference to it in my logs now (set to mid) or headers. It still seems to be working fine from here (see http://www.declude.com/spamtrap.htm ). Could you post the longer line that begins with SPAMCOP from your \IMail\Declude\global.cfg file? Are E-mails failing other IP-based spam tests? -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers. Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection. Find out what you have been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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 was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] spamcop?
We're using our internet provider's DNS server. It seems to work, but I don't know how to test it for the types of queries declude uses. nslookup works fine. -- David FletcherInfoTech International, LLC. (904)338-9234 (904)721-1253 fax http://www.ITI-InfoTech.com Any event, once it has occurred, can be made to appear inevitable by a competent historian. -Original Message- From: R. Scott Perry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 1:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] spamcop? Debug gives me these lines: 07/07/2003 13:10:54 Qa9930eca013e736e Test 1-SPAMCOP didn't get a response. 07/07/2003 13:10:54 Qa9930eca013e736e Test 2-JAPAN didn't get a response. 07/07/2003 13:10:54 Qa9930eca013e736e Test 3-MONKEYFORMMAIL didn't get a response. 07/07/2003 13:10:54 Qa9930eca013e736e Test 4-MONKEYPROXIES didn't get a response. Ah, that helps. Is the first DNS server that is listed in your IMail SMTP settings working properly? -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers. Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection. Find out what you have been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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 was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] Declude JunkMail v1.68 (beta) released
You could always reverse it and set the number of characters really low and add a negative weight if it failed. ;) Not that that would be any more useful, but it is nice to have a product that's so flexible. __ David Fletcher InfoTech International, LLC. (904)338-9234 (904)721-1253 fax http://www.ITI-InfoTech.com __ -Original Message- From: Kami Razvan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: * [Declude.JunkMail] Declude JunkMail v1.68 (beta) released Hi; I am curious what is the rational for using LongSubject test. Based on what I see SPAMers are using shorter and shorter subject lines and these days, for the most part, are trying to be less and less descriptive... The example used was for 60 characters.. This email announcing release of 1.68 had over 60 characters.. All it takes is for a list to be replied to and this test will be triggered. I am curious as to why this test could be found useful? Regards, Kami -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 8:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: * [Declude.JunkMail] Declude JunkMail v1.68 (beta) released I personally would like to see some examples and more details on how to implement new test when you email a notice like this announcing them. That's what this list is for. :) The nonenglish test type will detect E-mails that are not in English (specifically, ones that are using foreign characters in the Subject: header). It can be defined in the global.cfg fileas: NONENGLISH nonenglish * * 1 0 The subjectchars and subjectspaces tests work by counting the number of characters in a subject and the number of spaces, respectively. The test definition will define how many characters or spaces must appears before the test will be triggered. So the following tests would catch E-mail with a subject greater than 60 characters, and one with more than 15 spaces: LONGSUBJECT subjectchars 60 * 3 0 SUBJECTSPACES subjectspaces 15 * 3 0 Finally, the dnsbl test type will let you use any type of DNS-based spam test, aside from the current ip4r and rhsbl style tests. This likely won't be useful until future tests make it worthwhile. A sample would be: SOMEHELOTEST dnsbl %HELO%.bl.example.com 127.0.0.3 5 0 -Scott --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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 was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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 was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] Where I'm At Now and Where Should I Be Going?
Speaking of SPAMCOP, one option would be to increase the weight that that test applies. Then you will block mail that fails that test and another, but pass mail that fails only that test. YMMV __ David Fletcher InfoTech International, LLC. (904)338-9234 (904)721-1253 fax http://www.ITI-InfoTech.com __ -Original Message- From: Dan Geiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 11:36 AM To: Declude JunkMail Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Where I'm At Now and Where Should I Be Going? Hello, All, I am pushing hard to learn as much about Declude.JunkMail as my time allows during the trial period. I think I installed on February 11th so I'm about 17 days into the trial. I was hoping to get some feedback from the list as far as things I might have looked over and might want to consider looking into next. Just to bring things up to speed... I am currently testing Declude.JunkMail Beta v1.67. I have isolated 2 in-house hosts (out of the 90 we have on our IMail server) for testing purposes. For each host I did some pre-analysis to find out what an ideal hold weight would be for each. For the first host, with the domain name NEXUSTECHGROUP.COM, I came up with WEIGHT13 as my hold weight. For the second host, with the domain name PAGEROVER.COM, I came up with WEIGHT12 as my hold weight. NEXUSTECHGROUP.COM probably gets about 90% legitimate e-mail and PAGEROVER.COM probably gets about 95% (or higher) spam e-mail. Once I set up the hold weight most spam immediately started being caught by Declude. Those who receive e-mail at those domains were very impressed. But there are still the occasional spam e-mail which make it under the threshold of the hold weight. To further fine tune Declude.JunkMail I have done 2 things, one which was my idea (and I'm comfortable with) and another which was done to please my boss, which I don't necessarily agree with: Fine Tuning #1: This is the one I am comfortable with... In addition to the hold weight I also hold e-mail for a test that I created called SENDERBLOCK. SENDERBLOCK is defined in GLOBAL.CFG as SENDERBLOCK fromfile D:\iMail\declude\senderblock.txt x 0 0. This is based upon the test described in the Your own sender blacklists section of the Declude.JunkMail. Whenever a spam e-mail slips under my hold weight I add the sender's domain (provided it's an obvious spamming domain) to this list. That test has helped to filter a few more spam e-mails out of my user's inboxes. Fine Tuning #2: This one I'm less comfortable with... My boss noticed that a number of the spam e-mails that were still slipping in underneath the hold weight were failing the test SPAMCOP. He wanted to know how come I wasn't filtering out all e-mails that failed that test as, from his estimation, the SPAMCOP test was using a list of known spammers. I explained in detail the information I gleamed from the Declude.JunkMail web site and the SPAMCOP web site about the accuracy of the SPAMCOP test. I know that the SPAMCOP test finds mail server which have a high incidence of spam to legitimate e-mail but that real e-mail can pass through those servers. I told him I'd rather continue to filter on spam domains (via SENDERBLOCK) and that I was trying to avoid catching any legitimate e-mail altogether. I'm trying to set the bar low enough so that a) most spam is caught, b) no legitimate e-mail is caught and then c) filtering further for actual identified spam e-mails. He thinks it's too much overhead to add each domain name whereas I think over time as I add more and more domains to the list the number of domains I have to add will go down considerably. Needless to say I gave in and just started holding for the SPAMCOP test because I really didn't feel like taking the time to turn him over to my spam blocking philosophy. So that's basically where I'm at right now and from this I've come up with a number of questions and/or comments I am looking for feedback on. Mostly I'm looking for best practices sorts of answers from the community as a whole... #1) Are there are any other tests, which I am missing, like the SENDERBLOCK test which I might want to consider adding to my bag of tricks to continue to filter out spam e-mail which slide in under my hold weight and also fall in line with my philosophy, i.e. catching legit e-mail is a bad thing? #2) Am I correct in my assumption that holding for SPAMCOP is a bad idea or is there so little legitimate e-mail passing through a server on the SPAMCOP list that if I am holding on that test the chance of actually catching legit e-mail is pretty low? #3) In addition to what I've learned about about Declude.JunkMail itself, I've also started using two of the 3rd-party freeware tools that have been released by Declude devotees, SpamReview and Delog. SpamReview is great and I use it every day to take a quick look at all of the e-mail
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: Exim error message (X-RBL-Warning..)
From the message you attached: forced failure: SPAMCHK: Message failed SPAMCHK: -65. And the offending line in the headers: X-RBL-Warning: SPAMCHK: Message failed SPAMCHK: -65. Is it possible that Exim is seeing SPAMCHK: as a separate part of the header because of the colon? __ David Fletcher InfoTech International, LLC. (904)338-9234 (904)721-1253 fax http://www.ITI-InfoTech.com __ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Markus Gufler Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 9:59 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: Exim error message (X-RBL-Warning..) In this case, since they don't seem to care *which* spam tests fail (the fact that you use an X-RBL-Warning: header rather than blocking the E-mail typically indicates that the test doesn't justify blocking the E-mail), I would recommend using a trick to allow you to keep the X-RBL-Warning: headers while still getting this mail through. ... I can't follow: The default- and per Domain configuration is used to process incoming mail for this specific domain. But the Exim Mail server bounce our messages with the outgoing X-RBL-Warnings from declude. As I know only the pro version handle the outgoing actions set in the global.cfg So I'm neither able to disable only outgoing warnings. The problem is, that we has had this problem with more then one of our domains/clients in the last month. The austrian ISP seem's to be a large provider with many clients. The next strange thing is, that not all messages are bounced by the Exim MTA. Also after an extensive research I wasn't able to identify why. I have no headers of messages that was delivered successfully. One bounced error maessage is attached to this mail. The question is: Why Exim can have something against X-RBL-Warnings? Are this warnings a standard or a declude specific message? How can I prevent adding any header to outgoing messages? (if this solves the problem) Markus --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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] [IMail Forum] May Spam Statistics
OK Scott, Looking at the two example lines below, what would be the difference. Obviously, they are weighted different (5 and 8), but what is the default setting for the HEUR test. (As opposed to 10 for the HEUR10 test.) I have added both of these lines to watch what gets tripped, but I don't really see a ryme or reason. (I did have to bump the weight on HEUR10 down to 5 because it was putting a couple mailing lists just over the top. Not a complaint, just an observation.) The heuristics tests have never been officially released from beta, mostly because there are a number of false positives on mailing lists. However, it can work well with the weighting system, so it may come back to life. To use them, you need to define the test in the \IMail\Declude\global.cfg file, like this: HEURheuristics x x 5 0 or: HEUR10 heuristics 10 x 8 0 The 10 there is a spaminess level, from 1 to 10, where 1 is almost certainly not spam and 10 is almost certainly spam. Then, you need to determine the action to take (IE HEUR10 WARN), or you can just have it count towards the weighting system. -Scott Thanks, David __ David Fletcher InfoTech International, LLC. (904)721-0867 (904)721-1253 fax http://www.iti-infotech.com (business) http://www.mahonri.org (personal) __ --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.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. You can E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. You can visit our web site at http://www.declude.com .
