Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white pape

william(at)elan.net wrote:

I do know that Earthlink said they were not rejecting emails
based on SPF


That's true, I got about 150 erroneous challenges from their
completely broken C/R system despite of my SPF -all policy in
four months.  All manually LART-confirmed and SpamCopped.  Bye.

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: Sendmail white paper, (continued) Re: Sendmail white paper, David Woodhouse "worm spam" and SPF, Fridrik Skulason Re: "worm spam" and SPF, David Woodhouse Re: "worm spam" and SPF, Alex van den Bogaerdt Re: "worm spam" and SPF, Peter Snow Re: "worm spam" and SPF, Fridrik Skulason Re: "worm spam" and SPF, Alex van den Bogaerdt My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white paper), william(at)elan.net Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white paper), David Woodhouse Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white paper), william(at)elan.net Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white paper), Frank Ellermann <= portent.listbox.com, Richard Bang RE: portent.listbox.com, Mark RE: portent.listbox.com, Richard Bang Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white paper), David Woodhouse Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white paper), william(at)elan.net Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white paper), william(at)elan.net Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics, Rand Wacker Re: Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics, David Woodhouse RE: Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics, terry Re: Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics, Stephen Pollei

Re: My notes from FTC Summit with statistics (was: Sendmail white paper)