jdow writes:
From: Alexander Piavka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 23:16, Alexander Piavka took the opportunity to
write:
Hi , i'd like to know if its possbile and how, to ignore specific rule
scores (like ALL_TRUSTED)
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 23:16, Alexander Piavka took the opportunity to write:
Hi , i'd like to know if its possbile and how, to ignore specific rule
scores (like ALL_TRUSTED) then calculating the autolearn threshold for
spam and ham?
Like
From: Alexander Piavka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 23:16, Alexander Piavka took the opportunity to write:
Hi , i'd like to know if its possbile and how, to ignore specific rule
scores (like ALL_TRUSTED) then calculating the
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 23:16, Alexander Piavka took the opportunity to write:
Hi , i'd like to know if its possbile and how, to ignore specific rule
scores (like ALL_TRUSTED) then calculating the autolearn threshold for
spam and ham?
Like ALL_TRUSTED, eh? If you have a problem with
Alexander Piavka wrote:
What is the difference between the check_rbl* and check_uridnsbl*
tests. They seem to be made for the same purpose?
They are similar, but not the same.
check_rbl is for checking MTA IP addresses found in the mail headers.
check_uridnsbl is for checking URLs found
Hi , i'd like to know if its possbile and how, to ignore specific rule
scores (like ALL_TRUSTED) then calculating the autolearn threshold for
spam and ham?
Thanks
What is the difference between the check_rbl* and check_uridnsbl* tests.
They seem to be made for the same purpose?
Thanks.
Alexander Piavka wrote:
What is the difference between the check_rbl* and check_uridnsbl* tests.
They seem to be made for the same purpose?
check_rbl* tests look at the IP addresses of the systems that sent the
mail -- basically, what shows up in the Received: lines once they get
out of
