nei1_j Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Delivered-To: x Received: by 10.70.28.226 with SMTP id e2csp128240pdh; Tue, 21 May 2013 08:34:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.68.163.132 with SMTP id yi4mr3336989pbb.64.1369150465811; Tue, 21 May 2013 08:34:25 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <x> Received: from munitism.com ([2803:d300:5461:3451::1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id wt9si2817765pab.95.2013.05.21.08.34.24 for <x>; Tue, 21 May 2013 08:34:25 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 2803:d300:5461:3451::1 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of x[at]x.munitism.com) client-ip=2803:d300:5461:3451::1; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 2803:d300:5461:3451::1 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of x[at]x.munitism.com) smtp.mail=x[at]x.munitism.com Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 08:34:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <519b___________________________________________SING[at]mx.google.com> From: x Subject: x Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Choose up to 50k Protection for your Family <a href="http://munitism.com/x"> ----------- And the Parser says: Yum, this spam is fresh! Message is 0 hours old No reporting addresses found for 2803:d300:5461:3451:0:0:0:1, using devnull for tracking. [Darn.] ----------- Sometimes, it seems like all the spams in my gmail-spam-folder are ipv6, and they're only going to Devnull, not being reported to the sender's ISP. But I might be wrong. If there are ipv6's that are sufficiently identified and reported, then I'm probably processing them without giving them a 2nd thought, and I only notice the ones that only go to Devnull. In summary, I'm getting plenty of ipv6 spams from gmail that are not being sufficiently identified and therefore not reported to the sender's ISP. Is that a problem with all ipv6 spams? Thanks, -neil- PS: Are you getting email spasms? How about leg spams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.