Jump to content

chris

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About chris

  • Rank
    Member
  1. That explains a lot... I thought I could turn it on myself, but don't worry: I'll drop you a line in a few days. Let me test it a little more first
  2. Is it correct that the quick reporting feature is removed? Now all my mailhosts are set-up 100% correctly and I would like to lower the work involved in reporting I can't seem to find the quick reporting feature anymore...
  3. I did, but due to the fact that the data connected to the mailhost is GLOBAL the wrong information kept popping back. Just to let you know... Offcourse... but al long I can't use the mailhost system I'm not going to report spam, as checking and validating each report is way too much work. I just wanted to do an easy contribution to the spam problem
  4. I guess so.... 30-4: online mailhosts testing (...) 8-5: SC- me - waiver granted 9-5 me to SC - thanks; waiver granted, but it doesn't seem te be working 10-5 SC to me - try it now; should be working 10-5 me to SC - thanks, it works; but mailhost are not correct (possible problem?) 11-5 me to SC- sorry, I wrote that it worked; but thats not true (my own ISP is being marked as spammer) 11-5 SC to me - try again 11-5 me to SC - works! but is it stable? 11-5 SC to me - not at all; Julian looked at it; there are just too many wrong configure mailservers and localhosts 12-5 me to SC - mailservers conpletely re-routed by ISP's (2), please set-up the following mailhosts. 13-5 SC to me - go ahead and register them yourself; we cannot do that.. 13-5 me to SC - (basic info of) mailhost were set-up online; hereby the required changes/corrections (...) 15-5 me to SC - reminder; due to the fact I'm dying to start reporting again... 16-5 me to SC - reminder; plus note that I put some suggestions online as I think this whole 'thing' is costing both of use way too much time.. (it should be possible to have things more simple and effective) ... but 2 more reminders (last on 21-5) later I feel it's way too much trouble (for me and SC) to get things thing running; so instead of investing more of my time SC I decided it's not worth anymore to help the world in reporting spam. So I guess i'll have to rewrite our company-mailrules this week to auto-delete received spam. Too bad.
  5. Thanks for the information... So I'll guess I'll have to stop bothering trying to report spam as it's really TOO MUCH trouble to get this thing going.... and the deputies are not able to help. Best Regards, Chris
  6. I saw... but in the cc of the report/forward It's just "Delivered-To:" So that's not the problem (I think...) My problem is that my mailhost are still not correcty set-up and I'm now wondering what to do...
  7. http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z491692834z25...9017bf4221d4e5z What can I do to avoid this (except contacting the deputies)?
  8. Like I said before: But back to the subject: why not a more flexible but still robust system? Because I started this discussion for that; not for solving my problem. Solving the problem I tried to do by mailing the deputies....
  9. Just to let you know: possible open relays (dsl-range), what has been mailed to the deputies.
  10. In reply to your reaction: No, not always.... as SC - in my case - has been adding hosts/ip's to 'my mailhost' with each waiver I requested. The mailhosts themselves are not wrong, they are just on the wrong place now. No, not in my case.... as SC has been adding these hostnames to 'my mailhost' due to waivers I requested. If they would have just provided an field to explain the waiver-request they would not have been adding the hostnames to this mailhost but one maybe called mycompany.com. Now SC even added one of my internal hostnames to the mailhost of my ISP. So this hostname now contains more wrong information then correct information. (5 wrong entries; 1 correct one) I understand... but in my case the mail is not forwarded from one account to another. It's fixed routed by DNS. I.e. I cannot mail the account seperate !! This is my configuration now: 0 - our internal mailserver 1 - ourisp's mailserver (mailhost A) 2 - our anti-virus-providers mailserver (mailhost Notes / My problems: - Mailhost B is still missing an hostname. - Mailhost A is containing different hostnames/IP's as SC is thinking these are hostnames/IP's of my ISP. But there not... But back to the subject: why not a more flexible but still robust system? Because I started this discussion for that; not for solving my problem. Solving the problem I tried to do by mailing the deputies.... Best Regards, Chris
  11. Thanks for your opinion is this matter. Hereby my reply’s… …what is exactly my problem as the host prior to my registered mailhosts could (happened before) be the hostnames/ IP’s that should not be in my list. I know that the actual reporting methods are not changed, that is not the point. But due to this new way it’s possible to set-up auto-reporting. I.e. set things up, start reporting (properly and 100% accurate), and worrying about other things in life… I don't understand what you are trying to say... and besides that: you turned my words/sentences.. Yes (waiver was given) and No (see below) You definitely have a good point... but you understand it's also at least strange that I don't have my mailhosts set-up correctly (!!) after 3 weeks, while I can exactly let how the mailhosts should look like. BUT neither me or the deputies can edit my mailhosts... At least till now! Why? I just need one hostname added to my first mailhost, and have all the wrong (false) hostnames/IP’s deleted from my second mailhost… That's what I was trying to say in my first post... But even IF this is done there will always be a chance that the mailhosts ‘change’. I.e. don’t reflect the reality anymore due to wrongly added hostnames/IP’s…. what could result in false/wrong reports! How about that?! Best Regards, Chris
  12. After struggling for 3 (!) weeks with the Beta Mailhosts System I must say that the idea is great, but the concept translated into practice needs some fine-tuning… First, I would like to say: I’m not as System Administrator! I’m just and (advanced) end-user who came to SC because he was looking for a way to auto-report received spam’s to ISP’s. Unfortunately I quickly found out that auto-reporting was a big no-go around here…but luckily there was this new way of reporting spam’s. So I subscribed and tried to set-up my mailhosts what failed BIG time. Not due to SC, but due to the fact my mail was traveling 3 (!) ISP’s with numerous localhost mail servers. My fault, so this should not influence my opinion… But after I’ve completely re-routed my mail I tried to re-apply, what off course still didn’t work out directly as my mail was still traveling two mail server. But requesting a waiver should not be a problem (for anybody). But what the problem is that mailhosts are only GLOBAL and one of the two mailhosts I now need is full of junk due to my numerous try-outs; by myself of by deputies in the time my mail was traveling multiple servers… So therefore I’m getting more and more annoyed that – 3 weeks later – I still didn’t manage to have things set-up stable. Because even if it all works now the hosts and IP’s mentioned in my two mailhosts are not correct. So why can’t I delete/edit wrong mailhosts entries or request to have some entries from mailhost deleted/editted. Why is this? I have no idea… Wouldn’t it be much simpler and just as safe to have people – if they like – to set-up their own PERSONAL mailhost? Mailhost that aren’t global and therefore not subject to change! I understand the idea behind the global mailhost, but I would like to suggest to offer global and personal mailhosts: global for the normal users (easy to set-up and auto-updated); personal mailhost for the more advanced configurations where the more advanced users can set-up their own configuration. Because even if I now manage to have SC add one hostname to a mailhost, and delete 3 hostnames and 2 IP’s from another mailhost (= correcting the error’s made till now) there will be always a change that the mailhosts change. I.e. that my auto-reporting doesn’t work anymore and I would be forced re-configure things… (Because if in the process of setting up my mailhosts SP system managed to add wrong and internal hosts to my ISP’s hostname, I assume others will be able to do the same. – on purpose or not; that doesn’t matter.) So I’m wondering what other people think of this idea and the new beta mailhosts system in general? Let us know… Best Regards, Chris
×