On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:18:32PM +0100, Andy Spiegl wrote: > > Or better, skip spamassassin processing altogether for SMTP AUTH > > connections (if possible) > > But _everyone_ using spamassassin in the whole world would have to do > that. Otherwise my and my users mails get sorted out because they > were sent from a dial-up IP pool.
These rules aren't supposed to fire if the dialup was the first hop and not the hop that was talking to your "trusted" mail server which is running spamassassin. > That's the point I don't understand about punishing dial-up connects. > Half the world connects to the internet using dial-up accounts! Okay, > lots of them are using webmailers, but everyone else who is using real > mail programs is being punished with this high score. Doesn't sound > fair to me. Only a problem for dialups sending directly to the scanning server's trusted hosts. This is as it should be. It's just hard to get around for those of us using SMTP AUTH and running SpamAssassin from procmail. > Or is there a way to avoid that the dynamic IP shows up in the > received lines? I'd be surprised... > > Comments and sugestions more than welcome, > Andy. > > PS: How come so many on this list use broken mailers which don't set the > reply-to header correctly? Most of the threads are split up which > makes the list pretty hard to read. :-( You mean in-reply-to? It's the people who start a new thread by replying to an existing post rather than retype the list's address and fail to remove the references and in-reply-to headers. -- Scott Lambert KC5MLE Unix SysAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
