North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: unwise filtering policy from cox.net

  • From: Eliot Lear
  • Date: Wed Nov 21 07:53:41 2007
  • Authentication-results: ams-dkim-2; [email protected]; dkim=pass (s ig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; );
  • Dkim-signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=200; t=1195649475; x=1196513475; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; [email protected]; z=From:=20Eliot=20Lear=20<[email protected]> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20unwise=20filtering=20policy=20from=20cox.net |Sender:=20; bh=e7AGnU3mqzZhIfqSRCbhCksEtabytiSjsTHX9eMNo/8=; b=I0NIXhMSZ8nuIjmQyiRsXbDXr8Cvgc9hBAYgjTFhvRKCbUy3DqewtaVqKrWQY6T6a9AcFXi5 7+g1Nu9JqB4K2ERhdE7Ickb5GnM1iknZUstD2QhEIplOslUAjPzkKMMc;
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> Most mailservers do allow you to exempt specific addresses from filtering.
>   

On the LHS of the @ of a remote address?  I think that was Sean's point.

Eliot