gmane.mail.spam.srs.general archive

367 archived articles, newest first (page 1 of 4). Latest articles →

Re: Uploaded my SRS implementation for courier to the web
Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:22:01 +0000
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> • #881
Uploaded my SRS implementation for courier to the web
Sat, 17 Mar 2007 17:30:28 +0100
Matthias Wimmer <[email protected]> • #880
Wrapper around libsrs2 for Courier
Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:21:37 +0100
Matthias Wimmer <[email protected]> • #879
Is libsrs2 completely dead?
Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:27:46 +0100
Matthias Wimmer <[email protected]> • #878
Re: SRS and Callbacks
Mon, 15 Jan 2007 21:19:49 -0500 (EST)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #877
Re: SRS and Callbacks
Mon, 15 Jan 2007 17:24:56 -0500
Chris Sweeney <[email protected]> • #876
Re: SRS and Callbacks
Mon, 15 Jan 2007 00:29:28 -0500 (EST)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #875
SRS and Callbacks
Mon, 15 Jan 2007 00:17:18 -0500
Chris Sweeney <[email protected]> • #874
Re: SRS and Callbacks
Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:24:48 -0500
Chris Sweeney <[email protected]> • #873
Re: SRS and Callbacks
Mon, 15 Jan 2007 12:05:38 -0500 (EST)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #872
SRS in .forward not working for me. help please.
Thu, 7 Dec 2006 10:25:51 +0100
"Edward Arrigo" <[email protected]> • #871
RE: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Sat, 2 Dec 2006 11:24:42 -0500 (EST)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #870
(unknown)
Sat, 2 Dec 2006 01:33:18 -0200
"Deisi" <[email protected]> • #869
RE: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:24:50 -0600
"Seth Goodman" <[email protected]> • #868
Re: SPF tracking exist mechanisms
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 19:37:27 -0500
Michael Weiner <[email protected]> • #867
SPF tracking exist mechanisms
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 17:51:15 -0600
wayne <[email protected]> • #866
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 1 Dec 2006 23:32:02 +0000
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> • #865
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 1 Dec 2006 16:20:49 -0500
"Dick St.Peters" <[email protected]> • #864
Re: Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 17:49:35 +0000
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> • #863
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 10:14:46 -0500
Michael Weiner <[email protected]> • #862
RE: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 16:18:22 GMT
Mark <[email protected]> • #861
RE: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 16:09:41 GMT
Mark <[email protected]> • #860
RE: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 15:59:36 GMT
Mark <[email protected]> • #859
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 10:39:14 -0500
"John A. Martin" <[email protected]> • #858
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 15:13:20 +0000
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> • #857
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 09:08:23 -0600
wayne <[email protected]> • #856
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 1 Dec 2006 09:56:44 -0500 (EST)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #855
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:51:22 -0600
wayne <[email protected]> • #854
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:48:48 +0000
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> • #853
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:39:32 -0600
wayne <[email protected]> • #852
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 1 Dec 2006 09:25:58 -0500
"Dick St.Peters" <[email protected]> • #851
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 1 Dec 2006 09:04:54 -0500 (EST)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #850
Re: Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 8:44:54 -0500
Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> • #849
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:32:55 -0500
"John A. Martin" <[email protected]> • #848
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 13:00:50 +0000
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> • #847
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:45:16 +0000
Camart Ltd <[email protected]> • #846
RE: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:32:36 GMT
Mark <[email protected]> • #845
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:22:25 +0000
Camart Ltd <[email protected]> • #844
RE: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spffail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:20:51 GMT
Mark <[email protected]> • #843
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 1 Dec 2006 10:45:05 +0000
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> • #842
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Fri, 01 Dec 2006 10:12:25 +0000
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> • #841
Re: private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:08:46 -0500 (EST)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #840
private relay ... could i use srs to avoid spf fail?
Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:22:39 +0000
Camart Office <[email protected]> • #839
RE: Re: SRS for postfix ?
Sun, 20 Aug 2006 00:53:19 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #838
RE: Re: SRS for postfix ?
Fri, 18 Aug 2006 12:22:40 -0400
"Dick St.Peters" <[email protected]> • #837
Re: seeing SRS0 in email from field
Fri, 18 Aug 2006 03:11:17 -0500
"David Nicol" <[email protected]> • #836
Re: seeing SRS0 in email from field
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:11:12 -0700
Dan <[email protected]> • #835
Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:12:41 -0400
"John A. Martin" <[email protected]> • #834
Re: Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:05:05 +0200
Xavier Beaudouin <[email protected]> • #833
RE: Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:04:28 -0400
"Blum, Gabriel" <[email protected]> • #832
RE: Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:21:17 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #831
RE: Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:42:30 -0400
"Blum, Gabriel" <[email protected]> • #830
Re: Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:33:51 -0400
Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> • #829
Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:42:36 -0400
"John A. Martin" <[email protected]> • #828
Re: Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 12:38:21 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #827
Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:48:41 -0400
"John A. Martin" <[email protected]> • #826
Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:15:30 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #825
Re: SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 07:54:35 -0400
Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> • #824
SRS for postfix ?
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:46:34 +0200
Xavier Beaudouin <[email protected]> • #823
Re: seeing SRS0 in email from field
Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:32:00 +0200
Jean-Pierre Schwickerath <[email protected]> • #822
seeing SRS0 in email from field
Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:29:48 -0700
Dan <[email protected]> • #821
Re: Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Wed, 16 Aug 2006 10:29 -0400
Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> • #820
Re: Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Tue, 15 Aug 2006 13:38:55 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #819
Re: Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Tue, 15 Aug 2006 08:05:19 -0400
Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> • #818
Re: Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:11:26 +0200
Jean-Pierre Schwickerath <[email protected]> • #817
Re: Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Mon, 14 Aug 2006 13:56:49 -0400
Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> • #816
Re: Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Mon, 14 Aug 2006 08:54:21 +0200
Jean-Pierre Schwickerath <[email protected]> • #815
Re: Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Sun, 13 Aug 2006 20:07 -0400
Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> • #814
Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Sun, 13 Aug 2006 22:24:25 +0000
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> • #813
Re: Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Sun, 13 Aug 2006 14:46:28 -0700
Tom Lahti <[email protected]> • #812
Re: Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Sun, 13 Aug 2006 19:15:59 +0000
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> • #811
Allowed characters in SRS Hash
Sun, 13 Aug 2006 19:08:27 +0200
Jean-Pierre Schwickerath <[email protected]> • #810
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Wed, 12 Jul 2006 11:18:43 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #809
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Tue, 11 Jul 2006 10:31:07 -0400
"Dick St.Peters" <[email protected]> • #808
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 17:17:17 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #807
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:33:38 -0600 (MDT)
Robert Muchnick <[email protected]> • #806
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 20:08:25 +0100
Andy Shellam <[email protected]> • #805
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:02:56 -0500
"David Sowder" <[email protected]> • #804
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:49:23 -0600 (MDT)
Robert Muchnick <[email protected]> • #803
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 19:12:20 +0100
Andy Shellam <[email protected]> • #802
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:39:52 -0500
"David Sowder" <[email protected]> • #801
Re: SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:01:14 -0600 (MDT)
Robert Muchnick <[email protected]> • #800
SRS/SPF Help Needed
Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:56:58 +0100
"Andy Shellam" <[email protected]> • #799
Testing SRS
Thu, 25 May 2006 11:24:19 -0700 (PDT)
Craig Berry <[email protected]> • #798
Mailing list abuse
Tue, 9 May 2006 13:48:14 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #797
Re: Why SRS really sucks
Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:36:44 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #796
Re: Why SRS really sucks
Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:28:43 +0200
Hannah Schroeter <[email protected]> • #795
EHLO vs PTR for validation
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:48:02 +0000 (UTC)
"Johann Steigenberger" <[email protected]> • #794
EHLO vs PTR for validation
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 12:02:38 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #793
Re: Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 11:46:48 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #792
Re: Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 03 Apr 2006 16:12:46 +0100
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> • #791
Re: Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 11:01:28 -0400 (EDT)
"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]> • #790
Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 14:47:07 +0000 (UTC)
"Johann Steigenberger" <[email protected]> • #789
Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 14:10:56 +0000 (UTC)
"Johann Steigenberger" <[email protected]> • #788
Re: Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 03 Apr 2006 14:53:54 +0100
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> • #787
Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 13:30:34 +0000
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> • #786
Re: Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 03 Apr 2006 14:03:26 +0100
David Woodhouse <[email protected]> • #785
Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 12:46:28 +0000
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> • #784
Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 12:26:47 +0000 (UTC)
"Johann Steigenberger" <[email protected]> • #783
Re: Why SRS really sucks
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 12:02:38 +0000
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> • #782
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.