de.com>
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] X-RBL-Warning: domain: whatever.com
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 07:27:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.26
>X-RBL-Warning: domain: whatever.com
>What test is an email failing when the above is the warning?
That's most likely the MAILFROM test that is failing. That test will fail
if an E-mail arrives with a return address that is from a domain that does
not accept E-mail.
There's a slight chance,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] X-RBL-Warning: domain: whatever.com
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 08:31:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlo
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] X-RBL-Warning: domain: whatever.com
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 09:07:57 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlo
I now have seen it with version 1.23. I think it is a little different that
the problems in 1.24 and 1.25. There is only one process that is consuming
99% bandwidth and all the other declude process are working fine. The other
versions would launch multiple copies of declude for each smtp proces
>I now have seen it with version 1.23.
That may actually be good news, combined with not having any reports yet of
the interim release doing this (although it is too early to tell if the
interim release fixes the problem, since it can't be reproduced on
demand). I say it is good news because
de.com>
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 99% CPU NOT the case with v1.26-interimB
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 19:07:23 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Expres
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 20:10:17 -0400 <002601c147b1$91f87fd0$f4a81f41@taugher>
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 19:14:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-M
>We have not had any problems yet with v1.26-interimB. We had problems with
>v1.25a, and same when we backgraded to v1.24. This seems to have fixed it.
>We hadn't been able to more than 8-12 hours without a crash on v1.25a -- and
>it's been about 30 hours since I installed v1.26-interimB.
That
>What's with this sort of messaging?
>
> > de.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 99% CPU NOT the case with v1.26-interimB
> > Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 19:07:23 -0500
It's because the "References:" header exceeded the 1,000 character limit
for a single line and was not split into multiple li
10 matches
Mail list logo
