Jump to content

No IP-address, cannot report


Oriolus
 Share

Recommended Posts

HI,

If I send a number of spams to my reporting address, sometimes one of the spams result in a message "No IP-address, cannot report", or something like that.

My problem is then that I would be willing to retry to report the spam, but there is no reference what so ever with the error message, by which I could find the original spam-mail between the lot that I reported in one bunch.

Is there a way to get something recognizable in the error message, so that I can pick the culprit out of the bunch and report it "by hand"?

TIA, Oriolus

The exact messages are:

No source IP address found, cannot proceed.

and:

Nothing to do.

Edited by Oriolus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Topic moved from > How to use .... Instructions, Tutorials > SpamCop Reporting to SpamCop Reporting Help

PM sent to inform poster of the move

Note: to provide help we need to know what method of reporting you are doing.

Quick Reporting?

And how you are submitting them.

Forward as attachment multiple at a time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HI,

If I send a number of spams to my reporting address, sometimes one of the spams result in a message "No IP-address, cannot report", or something like that.

My problem is then that I would be willing to retry to report the spam, but there is no reference what so ever with the error message, by which I could find the original spam-mail between the lot that I reported in one bunch.

Is there a way to get something recognizable in the error message, so that I can pick the culprit out of the bunch and report it "by hand"?

TIA, Oriolus

The exact messages are:

No source IP address found, cannot proceed.

and:

Nothing to do.

You don't have SpamAssassin (set to "rewrite/enclose" in dealing with the headers) running somewhere in your message chain do you? Anyway, all I could suggest is "View recent reports" (via "Past Reports" tab) - if that spam was "nothing to do" then I guess nothing will be shown in there but all the others will be - with their subjects shown. So, it's a process of elimination. Pretty tedious but there will be a CAUSE of those "nothing to do" cases and you should be able to find and eliminate it - so you are not actually faced with this as a continuing process.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note: to provide help we need to know what method of reporting you are doing.

Quick Reporting?

And how you are submitting them.

Forward as attachment multiple at a time?

I compose a new mail addressed to my private SpamCop-address and move one or more spams into the body of this new mail (I use Outlook 2007) and press the send button. The spams will be attachments to a mail that lacks a subject line and a body.

After a while I go to http://www.spamcop.net/ and wait until I see that reports are awaiting to be sent.

If I would count every reported spam, I would be able to find back the one that didn't work, OK, but that is tedious, as you say, Farelf, but if I know which one it was and report it in the one-by-one way via the Outlook workaround form, it gets through alright. So there was nothing wrong with the spam itself, but (maybe) with the way it's offered to SpamCop.

I don't know what SpamAssassin is, so I think I don't have it :)

SpamCop v 2 Copyright (C) 1998-2006, IronPort Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.
Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference:
http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2110026233zb7541dcdc7d5af608c18b68153fcbf23z
No source IP address found, cannot proceed.
Add/edit your mailhost configuration
Finding full email headers
Submitting spam via email (may work better)
Example: What spam headers should look like
Nothing to do.

Can I recall the sender or subject line from this information?

Thanks

Edited by Oriolus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I recall the sender or subject line from this information?

The term Tracking URL is defined in the Dictionary, the Glossary, has entries in the single-page-access-expanded SpamCop FAQ found 'here', it has entries in the SpamCop Wiki .. has been referenced countless thosuands of times within this Forum structure ... and is offered in your provided snippet along with the detail of:

Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference:
http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2110026233zb7541dcdc7d5af608c18b68153fcbf23z

What exactly is missing in your experience that following this link does not provide you with the data you say you can't find?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly is missing in your experience that following this link does not provide you with the data you say you can't find?

If I click at the link mentioned:

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2110026233zb...18b68153fcbf23z

I get exactly the same window, as if I didn't click at the link...

SpamCop v 2 Copyright (C) 1998-2006, IronPort Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.
Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference:
http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2110026233zb7541dcdc7d5af608c18b68153fcbf23z
No source IP address found, cannot proceed.
Add/edit your mailhost configuration
Finding full email headers
Submitting spam via email (may work better)
Example: What spam headers should look like
Nothing to do.
Report another spam?
Welcome, Oriolus.
Your average reporting time is: 4 hours; Great!

Add fuel to your account
Please help support this service - buy some reporting fuel today. Fuel is used as you report spam to bypass the nag screen.

Forward your spam to: xxx or:
Paste headers and optionally mime separators in first box:

Paste decoded email body in second box:

Show technical details

Select all-in-one submission form 

So it doesn't give me any more information than I knew already.

Or did I do something wrong?

Edited by Oriolus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, when I go to the tracking URL, the parse details come up just fine. Specifically, one line stand out:

0: Received: from [83.10.122.98] by mail.wisecontrol.com; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:17:32 +0100
Hostname verified: aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl

Possible forgery. Supposed receiving system not associated with any of your mailhosts
Will not trust anything beyond this header

No source IP address found, cannot proceed.

This may indicate a mailhost configuration problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, when I go to the tracking URL, the parse details come up just fine.

This may indicate a mailhost configuration problem.

Also, if I report it (if I find the right one) in the Outlook/Eudora workaround form?

Because just then all things go well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, you have exposed your 'secret' reporting address in your recent post. One FAQ entry 'here' is Password Problems, Two different password solutions.

For the parse-result page, I'm suggesting that you either use the checkboxes provided or go into your Prefences on your logged-in ww.spamcop.net web-page and turn on Full/Technical Details. I saw the same results that Telarin saw .... there appears to a be an issue with the MailHost Configuration of your Reporting Account .. which is another whole subject, another Forum section.

Looking at it further, I'd say that those headers are a mess. I'd have to state that if your pasting into the web-form allegedly works, there is a significant difference between what you are selecting to paste in as compared to what you are including in the e-mail'd submission. Once again, the Tracking URLs of a set of corresponding submittal attempts might show the difference, but only you can provide that data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, you have exposed your 'secret' reporting address in your recent post.

Thank you Wazoo, I changed it, if not too late...

Looking at it further, I'd say that those headers are a mess. I'd have to state that if your pasting into the web-form allegedly works, there is a significant difference between what you are selecting to paste in as compared to what you are including in the e-mail'd submission. Once again, the Tracking URLs of a set of corresponding submittal attempts might show the difference, but only you can provide that data.

I'll check the Technical details box and see what are the differences, if I get a next opportunity :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, when I go to the tracking URL, the parse details come up just fine. Specifically, one line stand out:

In addition, above that area is a section showing the actual headers it is working on, including:

From: "Joanne Cullen" <dwwisecontrolm[at]wisecontrol.com>

To: <x>

Subject: Bring back time when girls were yours.

I assume you do not have "Show technical details" configured for your reporting. That MAY be why others see more than you do. Trick is, you need to process a new spam with that setting to make it stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I recognize that one as one in my spam-folder. Thanks for the clue!

I assume you do not have "Show technical details" configured for your reporting. That MAY be why others see more than you do. Trick is, you need to process a new spam with that setting to make it stick.

I knew about the way the sticky check box. I changed the settings for my whole account, though, and I'll check the differences between the two ways of reporting. You'll hear from me.

Thank you Wazoo, I changed it, if not too late...

I'll check the Technical details box and see what are the differences, if I get a next opportunity :)

Here is what I found in the Outlook workaround way (just a part that may make things clear?)

Parsing header:
0: Received: from zajda-t9ddi3b8n (aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.10.122.98]) by mwinf6603.online.nl (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 252481C00091; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:17:29 +0200 (CEST)
Hostname verified: aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl
orange.nl received mail from sending system 83.10.122.98

1: Received: from [83.10.122.98] by mail.wisecontrol.com; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:17:32 +0100
Hostname verified: aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl
Possible forgery. Supposed receiving system not associated with any of your mailhosts
Will not trust anything beyond this header

Sounds not very promising...

If more info is wanted, I'm glad to provide it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds not very promising...

If more info is wanted, I'm glad to provide it.

If that last bit of data was in fact the 'same' spam as seen in the Tracking URL initially provided, it would appear not to be the same spam ...yet, the IP Address 'complained' about is the same IP Address, which would tend to point to a MailHost Configuration issue.

However, no way I can tell from this side of the screen if it's an Outlook issue or a 'handling' issue in creating your submittal contents for the different submittal actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I recognize that one as one in my spam-folder. Thanks for the clue!

I knew about the way the sticky check box. I changed the settings for my whole account, though, and I'll check the differences between the two ways of reporting. You'll hear from me.

Here is what I found in the Outlook workaround way (just a part that may make things clear?)

Parsing header:
0: Received: from zajda-t9ddi3b8n (aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.10.122.98]) by mwinf6603.online.nl (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 252481C00091; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:17:29 +0200 (CEST)
Hostname verified: aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl
orange.nl received mail from sending system 83.10.122.98

1: Received: from [83.10.122.98] by mail.wisecontrol.com; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:17:32 +0100
Hostname verified: aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl
Possible forgery. Supposed receiving system not associated with any of your mailhosts
Will not trust anything beyond this header

Sounds not very promising...

If more info is wanted, I'm glad to provide it.

This is from the one that went wrong:

Parsing header:
0: Received: from [83.10.122.98] by mail.wisecontrol.com; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:17:32 +0100
Hostname verified: aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl
Possible forgery. Supposed receiving system not associated with any of your mailhosts
Will not trust anything beyond this header
No source IP address found, cannot proceed.
Add/edit your mailhost configuration
Finding full email headers
Submitting spam via email (may work better)
Example: What spam headers should look like
Nothing to do.

This makes sense indeed.

Would you like to see the original spam mail?

BTW, things are getting mixed up, sorry.

If that last bit of data was in fact the 'same' spam as seen in the Tracking URL initially provided, it would appear not to be the same spam ...yet, the IP Address 'complained' about is the same IP Address, which would tend to point to a MailHost Configuration issue.

However, no way I can tell from this side of the screen if it's an Outlook issue or a 'handling' issue in creating your submittal contents for the different submittal actions.

Would the original spam mail make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would the original spam mail make sense?

No, the original spam will not help us unless we could see it still in your mail account. We get enough spam on our own.

Is mail.wisecontrol.com a new ISP for your messages to travel through? Any changes in how you receive email need to be updated in Mailhost.

Have you already configured mailhosts for that ISP? They may have changed servers since that point and need to be reconfigured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the original spam will not help us unless we could see it still in your mail account. We get enough spam on our own.

Funny :)

Is mail.wisecontrol.com a new ISP for your messages to travel through? Any changes in how you receive email need to be updated in Mailhost.

mail.wisecontrol.com has, as far as I know, nothing to do with my ISP.

Have you already configured mailhosts for that ISP? They may have changed servers since that point and need to be reconfigured.

I should not do that, if I understand well...

Is mail.wisecontrol.com a new ISP for your messages to travel through? Any changes in how you receive email need to be updated in Mailhost.

According to Mcafee's SiteAdvisor, wisecontrol.com seems to be a trustable Korean site with lots of clients:

http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/wisecontrol.com/summary/

But maybe this is not the way of checking trustability of sites...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mail.wisecontrol.com has, as far as I know, nothing to do with my ISP.

OK... One step at a time. Here are the headers from the tracking URL you provided earlier:

Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mwinf6603.online.nl (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id DFF0D1C00099;
	Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:17:30 +0200 (CEST)

It looks like Online.nl is your ISP and this is an internal transfer on that machine (AV scans do this, or some other reason).

Received: from mwinf6603.online.nl (mwinf6603.online.nl)
	by mwinb6006 (SMTP Server) with LMTP; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:17:30 +0200

Here the mwinb6006 server should have be stating the IP address of the machine it is recieving from. Looking at the hostname, it could be internal to online.nl OR the hostname is (more likely) forged, which is why the IP address is needed. Both to these headers would be ignored since no IP address is provided. This is likely the line needed to be fixed and my bet is this is where the messages gets to your ISP.

Received: from [83.10.122.98] by mail.wisecontrol.com; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:17:32 +0100

This is the first header that says where it came from, but could be forged. If it is a valid header, the previous header should have indicated receiving the message from 221.139.3.226 which is the lookup of mail.wisecontrol.com

Received: from zajda-t9ddi3b8n (aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.10.122.98])
	by mwinf6603.online.nl (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 252481C00091;
	Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:17:29 +0200 (CEST)

Likely forged as it has the same names/IP's as the headers above it.

Other possibilities... there are headers missing from this group or they are out of order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK... One step at a time. Here are the headers from the tracking URL you provided earlier:

Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mwinf6603.online.nl (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id DFF0D1C00099;
	Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:17:30 +0200 (CEST)

It looks like Online.nl is your ISP and this is an internal transfer on that machine (AV scans do this, or some other reason).

Received: from mwinf6603.online.nl (mwinf6603.online.nl)
	by mwinb6006 (SMTP Server) with LMTP; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:17:30 +0200

To clear up possible dark things:

Wanadoo.nl was bought by orange (maybe not in this spam here), but orange.nl was in turn bought by online.nl, and this story probably goes for all of them, not only .nl, but .fr and .be and others.

So, what I probably have to do, if I understan well, is to introduce online.nl (and maybe orange.nl as well) as legal isp-adresses for my accounts.

But this might not solve the problem with wisecontrol.com which resides in Korea, and has probably nothing to do with online.nl as far as I heard of, but maybe I should ask that with the helpdesk of online.nl?

Here the mwinb6006 server should have be stating the IP address of the machine it is recieving from. Looking at the hostname, it could be internal to online.nl OR the hostname is (more likely) forged, which is why the IP address is needed. Both to these headers would be ignored since no IP address is provided. This is likely the line needed to be fixed and my bet is this is where the messages gets to your ISP.

Received: from [83.10.122.98] by mail.wisecontrol.com; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:17:32 +0100

This is the first header that says where it came from, but could be forged. If it is a valid header, the previous header should have indicated receiving the message from 221.139.3.226 which is the lookup of mail.wisecontrol.com

Received: from zajda-t9ddi3b8n (aclu98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.10.122.98])
	by mwinf6603.online.nl (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 252481C00091;
	Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:17:29 +0200 (CEST)

Likely forged as it has the same names/IP's as the headers above it.

Other possibilities... there are headers missing from this group or they are out of order.

Sorry, but I only try to understand what you are explaining to me. I get lost at the place where you suspect forgery.

Would it help if I send to you the headers of an email that you sent to me? Would that distinguish ISP-related addresses from others?

The reason why I prefer to bulk send spams rather than via the Outlook workaround way, is that I need not disclose the message body when sending bulk, whereas I have to, to be able to send the html-code (if I can get hold of it: sometimes I'm not!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it help if I send to you the headers of an email that you sent to me? Would that distinguish ISP-related addresses from others?

That could help, you can send me an email to underwood+forum[at]spamcop.net and put "Forum Test" in the subject so I won't accidentally report you. I will reply to that and you can then either reply back to me with my message attached (like you do to submit your spam to spamcop) or submit the message for reporting (submit.... not quick...) and post the resulting reporting URL here. Please do not report my message :)

I have a feeling you are going to need to do the MailHost again for Wanadoo but I think it will fail if the headers are as you are showing them, meaning they need to fix the headers first. The email test will hopefully determine that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That could help, you can send me an email to underwood+forum[at]spamcop.net and put "Forum Test" in the subject so I won't accidentally report you. I will reply to that and you can then either reply back to me with my message attached (like you do to submit your spam to spamcop) or submit the message for reporting (submit.... not quick...) and post the resulting reporting URL here. Please do not report my message :)

Just to be sure: I mailed you :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be sure: I mailed you :)

For completeness, here is the reporting URL for the headers you are sending out. Your address has been munged for extra protection.

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2111389372z5...58644299b36a22z

To answer the question in the email... ultimately, you will need to do both (if the headers prove to be the issue) getting the headers fixed and making sure that the new relationship is showing in mailhost... but the headers will not be working correctly in order to complete the mailhost config.

At this point, unless you are carefully checking your reports, you may not want to use quick reporting until this is straightened out. You could be reporting incorrect sources.

The TrackingURL from my message to you: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2112364329z5...fd3e546a1f62e2z

Could someone verify what I think is headers in the wrong order even though the parse turns out correct in this case. Below is what I would expect the headers to look like. The number is the order from the parser.

5.Received: from mwinf6301.online.nl (mwinf6301.online.nl)
	by mwinb6006 (SMTP Server) with LMTP; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 01:41:59 +0200
2.Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mwinf6301.online.nl (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 95E835C0008B
	for &lt;x&gt;; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 01:41:59 +0200 (CEST)
1.Received: from c60.cesmail.net (c60.cesmail.net [216.154.195.49])
	by mwinf6301.online.nl (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 4F0035C00088
	for &lt;x&gt;; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 01:41:59 +0200 (CEST)
4.Received: from unknown (HELO relay.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.81])
  by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 30 Jul 2008 19:41:58 -0400
3.Received: from SUnderwoodL (68-116-173-51.dhcp.oxfr.ma.charter.com [68.116.173.51])
	by relay.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDFFF618F22
	for &lt;x&gt;; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:41:57 -0400 (EDT)

I am working on getting hte same headers from my work account (sent the same message to work) to compare because even one of the cesmail headers seems out of order As I thought... when my Exchange server receives this same message, the SpamCop headers are in the order I would expect: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2112702203z0...fba09b0b6ebd4bz

Received:  from psmtp.com ([64.18.1.116]) by CENTMAIL.carroll-ent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 31 Jul 2008 07:35:37 -0400
Received:  from source ([216.154.195.49]) (using TLSv1) by exprod6mx216.postini.com ([64.18.5.10]) with SMTP; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 07:35:32 EDT
Received:  from unknown (HELO relay.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.81])  by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2008 07:35:32 -0400
Received:  from SUnderwoodL (68-116-173-51.dhcp.oxfr.ma.charter.com [68.116.173.51]) by relay.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5032618F22 for &lt;x&gt;; Thu, 31 Jul 2008  07:35:31 -0400 (EDT)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just received your report about Outlook workaround: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2112355099zc...c7cf58f8db7d82z

Those headers look as I would expect... so it appears something is going on with HOW you are submitting these that is messing with the headers.

Can you explain again, step by step, how you prepare the spams to email for submittal?

Are you using any 3rd party program to do this?

The message I submitted for the last test in my previous post was from Outlook 2003 with an Exchange v6.5 server. I have my forwarding options on one machine set to always "Foward as Attachment" and the headers stayed as shown, similiar to your "Exchange workaround" which if I recall is you pasting into the web page.

Even without that configuration, if you select more than one message and hit forward, the messages are attached (for me) showing the same order for the headers (I just tested).

BTW, one of your messages seemed to indicate you thought I have the ability to change your mailhost configuration. I am simply another user of SpamCop. You would need to contact the deputies directly if the standard method (through the web page) does not work, but I would not feel comfortable until we solve the "roaming headers" issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you explain again, step by step, how you prepare the spams to email for submittal?

Are you using any 3rd party program to do this?

1. The 'normal' way, not sending a number of spams in bulk, but via the Outlook/Eudora workaround way:

I find a spam in my Unwanted e-mails-folder (U-folder);

I move that mail to a folder where the body is displayed in a pane under the pane where sender's name and subject line are displayed;

I click right at the line in the upper pane with name and subject line and select from the roll down menu (translated) Message options, at which I get a window with what I would call the headers of that mail;

I select all in that window and copy selected, i.e. Ctrl-A, Crtl-C;

I switch to the SpamCop reporting site http://www.spamcop.net/sc, where we see: Report another spam? and the two panes for the workaround method:

Paste headers and optionally mime separators in first box:

<empty box 1>

Paste decoded email body in second box:

<empty box 2>

I paste what I copied into box 1 and observe what kind of message body I have to expect: text/plain, which means that I can copy the message body strait away, or differently, which means that I have to extract the body's HTML-code;

If it is differently (the second possibility: not text/plain) I almost always get the HTML-code with some effort and paste it into box 2. If I don't succeed getting the code, I copy the body as text, paste it into box 2, and apologize for not succeeding in getting the body in the right way into box 2 by means of a note that goes together with the report;

So, I report what's in box 1 and 2;

I move the spam mail from the folder to one where I keep reported spams for a while.

BTW In this way I have to more or less 'open' the spam's body which I hate.

2. The bulk way:

I have collected an amount of spams in my U-folder;

I select New Mail and select my SpamCop-reporting e-mail-address in the To:-field;

I click on the first spam in the U-folder. With Shift held, I click on the last spam in that folder. Holding down the mouse button I drag in this way all selected spams into the message pane of my New Mail;

I click on Send;

I wait a while until my reporting pane will show Unreported spam Saved: Report Now?;

=>I click the blue Report Now? and I get the (next) report to be reported;

I click the Send spam Report(s) Now-button and go back in this description to => until there is nothing more to report. ( OT: I don't get the word spam with a starting capital, very odd! )

BTW In this way I need not open any mail, so there will go no message (no matter how) back to the spammer or to some other sneaky place, where the spammer knows something more about me or gets his money for his deed.

I hope this is elaborate enough to find possible faulty actions of mine :(

The message I submitted for the last test in my previous post was from Outlook 2003 with an Exchange v6.5 server. I have my forwarding options on one machine set to always "Foward as Attachment" and the headers stayed as shown, similiar to your "Exchange workaround" which if I recall is you pasting into the web page.

I cannot find the way how to change the forwarding setting (I wouldn't like it standard like that, though), but, as described the effect is the same: by dragging them into the new mail, they appear as attachments.

Even without that configuration, if you select more than one message and hit forward, the messages are attached (for me) showing the same order for the headers (I just tested).

I don't forward my spams, I send them as attachments in a New Mail. Is that actually what's the thing that makes the headers get out of order? I wouldn't know, however, how to forward more than one mail; selecting (like I do to move them to my New Mail) an then press Forward (if possible, and what happens then?)?

BTW, one of your messages seemed to indicate you thought I have the ability to change your mailhost configuration. I am simply another user of SpamCop. You would need to contact the deputies directly if the standard method (through the web page) does not work, but I would not feel comfortable until we solve the "roaming headers" issue.

No, I was not expecting you to clear up my Mailhosts settings, I was thinking that you could peep into them, but that's not true, as I understand now.

Pff, that was a story! I hope you are not bored by now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't know, however, how to forward more than one mail; selecting (like I do to move them to my New Mail) an then press Forward (if possible, and what happens then?)?

That is exactly what you could do... that will open a new message with all of the selected spams attached. Then you simply address it and send it off like you currently do. In theory, this SHOULD produce the same headers as what you are doing (I do it your way from time to time as well and never noticed any issues) but what you are doing also SHOULD be producing the same header order for both of the methods you described. Your examples above show that is not happening.

I am away for the weekend on dialup (checking nights only). I hope someone else can pick this up and help in my absense. The next question I would ask is what version of Outlook are you using and how are you getting your messages from your ISP's server (Exchange, IMAP, POP, etc). All of my examples have been with Microsoft Office Outlook 2003 (11.8206.8202) SP3 connected to Exchange v6.5 from either Windows XP SP3 or Windows 2003 Server R2 SP2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The next question I would ask is what version of Outlook are you using and how are you getting your messages from your ISP's server (Exchange, IMAP, POP, etc). All of my examples have been with Microsoft Office Outlook 2003 (11.8206.8202) SP3 connected to Exchange v6.5 from either Windows XP SP3 or Windows 2003 Server R2 SP2.

I did see you mentioning (as I thought) that you were using Outlook 2003, but now I read this sentence, it was meant for me to answer (language :( ...).

I use Outlook 2007 (12.0.6316.5000) SP1 MSO (12.0.6213.1000) MS Office Prof, under Vista Home Premium SP1. My ISP asks me to use POP3.

I hope this is precise enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...