Mark Sapiro a écrit :
Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Well, I can't argue that in this instance free.fr does a better job of
detecting spam than the list, but a) free.fr does not provide mailing
lists beyond the most basic functionality, and b) I'm not in position to
suggest moving the list as I'm not the
Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>
>Well, I can't argue that in this instance free.fr does a better job of
>detecting spam than the list, but a) free.fr does not provide mailing
>lists beyond the most basic functionality, and b) I'm not in position to
>suggest moving the list as I'm not the owner, only a memb
Albert ARIBAUD writes:
> Regarding your suggestion of better spam detection at the earliest
> stage, I agree wholeheartedly. But while I might be able to suggest
> mailman settings to the list owner, heavier actions such as changing the
> spam detection methods in place on the list are out
Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit :
Albert ARIBAUD writes:
> But is there a way (besides patching and recompiling) to let mailman
> know that 5xx (and possibly 4xx as well) rejects which mention spam
> should not cause an increase of the bounce counter?
4xx should be handled at the MTA level by
Albert ARIBAUD writes:
> But is there a way (besides patching and recompiling) to let mailman
> know that 5xx (and possibly 4xx as well) rejects which mention spam
> should not cause an increase of the bounce counter?
4xx should be handled at the MTA level by retrying.
If I were you, I'd fi
Hi all,
I am subscribed to a list managed by... mailman. :)
From time to time, spam makes it to the list and is thus distributed to
list members. When this happens and the spam is delivered to my provider
(free.fr), this provider rejects it by a "550 Spam detected" message --
which is fine be
