Re: Moving forward ...
Craig Hughes <[email protected]> Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:49:35 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.asrg.filtering |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Yes, SUPERIDS might set some admin's pager off, or log something, or whatever. But meanwhile someone downstream's had their email intercepted and/or altered, and might want to be notified of that. The admin might call them, or send a separate email, but you could say the same about any type of filter down the line too; it seems that if anything should or could be inserting headers in the email to notify the downstream that some filtering action's been taken, then this would qualify, but doesn't, I think, fit in with any of the 3 things you'd outlined earlier. C On Feb 26, 2004, at 2:44 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > I think you're discussing an implementation of a protection scheme. > Generally this would be logged, or some sort of audit flag would be > raised for an admin. I wouldn't see an email with a filtering header > as > this flag though. > > Am I not grokking your point here?