Re: [Mimedefang] X-Auto-Response-Suppress header

2012-05-22 Thread Bernd Petrovitsch
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 12:22 -0700, kd6...@yahoo.com wrote: --- On Mon, 5/21/12, Bernd Petrovitsch be...@petrovitsch.priv.at wrote: On Don, 2012-05-17 at 16:02 -0700, kd6...@yahoo.com wrote: ... Beliefs like yours are the problem. Policies like mine cause the solution. Perhaps it

Re: [Mimedefang] X-Auto-Response-Suppress header

2012-05-22 Thread George Roberts
Exchange uses SMTP but generates a syntactically incorrect header. Similarly with Google's gmail (it often omits the from clause when required), Yahoo's use of an unregistered protocol (with NNFMP*), qmail, and of late, exim. Do you also then block mail from Gmail, Yahoo, qmail and exim if

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread kd6lvw
--- On Tue, 5/22/12, George Roberts grobe...@purity.net wrote: Exchange uses SMTP but generates a syntactically incorrect header.  Similarly with Google's gmail (it often omits the from clause when required), Yahoo's use of an unregistered protocol (with NNFMP*), qmail, and of late, exim.

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM, kd6...@yahoo.com wrote:  Over 90% of the messages so rejected are clearly spam (i.e. sent to a spamtrap mailbox) or have other problems. That doesn't seem like a particularly strong metric to me. What's your overall spam/non-spam ratio? -- Les Mikesell

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread kd6lvw
--- On Tue, 5/22/12, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM,  kd6...@yahoo.com wrote:  Over 90% of the messages so rejected are clearly spam (i.e. sent to a spamtrap mailbox) or have other problems. That doesn't seem like a particularly strong metric to

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 3:31 PM, kd6...@yahoo.com wrote:  Over 90% of the messages so rejected are clearly spam (i.e. sent to a spamtrap mailbox) or have other problems. That doesn't seem like a particularly strong metric to me.  What's your overall spam/non-spam ratio? In 2012, 50% to

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread David F. Skoll
All, I think this thread has played itself out. We can just accept the fact that kd6...@yahoo.com is to pedantry as RMS is to Free Software and move along. :) Regards, David. ___ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above

[Mimedefang] Indication of list poster's mail volume required?

2012-05-22 Thread Paul Murphy
Perhaps it is time to encourage the list subscribers to publicise how many addresses they are filtering for, and what volume of traffic they see. That way, when someone makes a contentious statement, we know it only affects them and their dog. For example, when someone says I've been blocking

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread kd6lvw
--- On Tue, 5/22/12, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote: ... Unless you like to reject just because you can.  Per rfc760 and a concept assumed through the rfcs:: In general, an implementation should be conservative in its sending behavior, and liberal in its receiving behavior. Put that

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread David F. Skoll
On Tue, 22 May 2012 16:18:49 -0700 (PDT) kd6...@yahoo.com wrote: Put that in contrast where RFC 5321 says MUST with regard to using the syntax listed therein for generating trace headers, your statement and policy loses every time.  A must use directive has no discretion. I reject not

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread kd6lvw
--- On Tue, 5/22/12, David F. Skoll d...@roaringpenguin.com wrote: On Tue, 22 May 2012 16:18:49 -0700 (PDT) kd6...@yahoo.com wrote: Put that in contrast where RFC 5321 says MUST with regard to using the syntax listed therein for generating trace headers, your statement and policy loses

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread David F. Skoll
On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:41:05 -0700 (PDT) kd6...@yahoo.com wrote: You completely missed what I said earlier. That part applies to NON-SMTP headers and says that we cannot and must not reject headers from other transports on the grounds that they don't meet SMTP's syntax. It doesn't apply to

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:41 PM, kd6...@yahoo.com wrote: Exchange and gmail claim SMTP transport but fail to follow the required syntax. Exchange isn't natively SMTP, so that mail doesn't originate in an SMTP environment. And if you want to claim to know more about internet mail that

Re: [Mimedefang] Received headers in general

2012-05-22 Thread Kevin A. McGrail
And if you want to claim to know more about internet mail that google well, good luck with that. Woohoo! I proved Google wasn't following an email RFC once. Do I get a gold star? Regards, KAM ___ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal

Re: [Mimedefang] Indication of list poster's mail volume required?

2012-05-22 Thread George Roberts
I filter mail for a little under 20,000 domains. The user numbers vary all the time, but this month's stats show about 70,000 users. We handle about 1.5 million messages a day. --- Regards, George -Original Message- From: mimedefang-boun...@lists.roaringpenguin.com