[antispam-f] Re: What have they got against Deborah anyway?
- From: Jeremy C B Nicoll <Jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: antispam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 23:22:26 +0000 (GMT)
In article <5863ff8a4e.Dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Dave Barnett <as10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yes, often you are only a cc. or bcc. recipient. If Demon don't use
> Envelope-To: they must have some way to identify your mailbox.
They don't really have mailboxes. You get a domain - in my case
"Omba". You can log in and collect mail for all of that, or a subset
if you want. But subsets are created dynamically from the pool of all
waiting mail at the instant when you log in.
Their own news/mail client Turnpike uses extensions to the pop3
protocol to retrieve smtp envelope info (remember demon started off as
an smtp-only isp, so everyone who was initially a demon user would run
their own smtp server. It was that that sold the ANT Suite solution
under RO). POP3 was added only to satisfy people wanting to access
their mail when travelling, eg by webmail. Demon user's mails arrive
with (because of the assumed smtp delivery method) with an extra
received: header which shows the smtp envelope info (as received: ...
for recipient ...." but it's not in a form that's readily directly
extractd and tested unless (my/Frank's/whoever's) AntiSpam specifically
looks for that info in that particular header.
> I confess that I have only a couple of To: deletes (and I could lose
> those), but a Defer To: may sometimes tell you if it worth looking
> further. Combining it with another rule that is not good enough on
> its own can work.
What specific "To:" values have you found useful?
--
Jeremy C B Nicoll, Edinburgh, Scotland - my opinions are my own.
Other related posts:
