David B Funk wrote: > I have a functionally equivalent rule that I created back in SA-2.5 days.
Me too. I started out making that a hard test. But I needed to back it out, darn it! Why can't legitimate MTAs play by the rules? > I had given it a hefty score (1.5) as it seend a good spam-sign, but > subsequently toned it down as I found some mail-list packages don't > add Message-IDs to their output. > I still have the rule, just with a low score (0.3). I just checked my folders and there is some high profile mail that that does not set the message id. Such as all of the Red Cross mail I have ever received. Verisign messages (well that is a type of spam). A large number of messages from various political parties (another type of spam). And various different automated order notification systems which I would not want to lose. I am not seeing any trouble with false positives so the current default SA value seems to be a good choice here. Bob
