On Mon, Aug 04, 2008, Peter Hardy wrote:
I for one think it's perfectly cromulent. If the sender MX utilises
greylisting then it'll send back a transient failure message as distinct
from a permanent 550 failure. At that point, the receiving MX can either
assume a transient failure means it's
Voytek Eymont [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have some web generated emails being sent as 'apache@' [as the
default web user] (which perhaps I should change, but it never really
caused problems in the past)
now, an isp appears to be doing a user lookup as below and bounces
emails, claiming my
Peter Hardy wrote:
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 14:10 +1000, Mary Gardiner wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008, Voytek Eymont wrote:
is there any req on me having an 'apache@' address if I'm sending
emails as such ?
(i.e., who misconfigured their server ?)
Sender address verification is a fairly common
On Mon, Aug 04, 2008, Phil Scarratt wrote:
Can we try changing the subject of this thread? All messages are being
moderated.
The thread Voytek started is to do with a specific error he got sending
a mail from a particular address to a particular mail server. It doesn't
have anything to do with
Mary Gardiner wrote:
On Mon, Aug 04, 2008, Phil Scarratt wrote:
Can we try changing the subject of this thread? All messages are being
moderated.
The thread Voytek started is to do with a specific error he got sending
a mail from a particular address to a particular mail server. It doesn't
mii-tool does not support gigabit.
Joel
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Tony Sceats [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Sluggers,
Anyone ever had mii-tool and ethtool tell them different things? As you can
see the duplex setting is being reported differently (this is a Broadcom
Corporation
Sorry, I should have followed up on this - it turns out that mii-tool was
reporting the correct information. I actually had to hard set it to 100Mbps
FD, so the gigabit support wasn't a problem.
Perhaps if I'd used ethtool to change the setting originally I wouldn't have
this problem, but anyway,
On Mon, August 4, 2008 2:19 pm, Scott Ragen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 29/07/2008 07:15:47 AM:
One could argue that either server is incorrectly configured. I suspect
the receiving email server is checking if the sending email is valid in an
attempt to stop spam. You could just alias
ok, lets try altering subject
On Mon, August 4, 2008 4:09 pm, Daniel Pittman wrote:
Voytek Eymont [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(i.e., who misconfigured their server ?)
You did.
You are sending out email that there is absolutely *NO* way for the
intended recipient -- or their server -- to
Position Requirements:
B.S. in Computer Science or Information Systems or equivalent work experience
Siebel Certified - Preferred 7.5 or greater
7+ years of software development experience
Strong knowledge of Siebel (5+ years), Siebel configuration and Siebel
development best practices.
Voytek Eymont [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, August 4, 2008 4:09 pm, Daniel Pittman wrote:
Voytek Eymont [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(i.e., who misconfigured their server ?)
You did.
You are sending out email that there is absolutely *NO* way for the
intended recipient -- or their server
On 5/08/2008 9:33 AM, AQL Jobs wrote:
Position Requirements:
B.S. in Computer Science or Information Systems or equivalent work experience
Siebel Certified - Preferred 7.5 or greater
7+ years of software development experience
Strong knowledge of Siebel (5+ years), Siebel configuration and
12 matches
Mail list logo
