Re: [Ticket #1032183] Autoreply: viadomains <bleep>
i have plonked all mail from vianetworks.co.uk. if they ever get a clue and have something useful to say, someone please tell me. randy
From: via-domains <domains@vianetworks.co.uk> RT-Ticket: Ticket #1032183 Managed-by: RT 3.2.3 (http://www.bestpractical.com/rt/) RT-Originator: randy@psg.com To: randy@psg.com
Thank you for your enquiry concerning "Re: [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #gamma IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria", a summary of which appears below. It has been logged with our automated ticketing system and will be forwarded on to the appropriate department.
You have been allocated a unique reference number - [Ticket #1032183] - for this query that should be used in all further correspondence relating to this matter. If replying by email, please make sure that the ticket number is in the subject header.
Thank you for your query,
VIA Networks UK Support Administration domains@vianetworks.co.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Spam detection software, running on the system "he401war", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or block similar future email. If you have any questions, see sysadmin@vianetworks.co.uk for details.
Content preview: >> and we once thought 32 bits of address should be enough for ever > *I* wasn't part of that "we" - and the math is a *little* bit different > here. > *I* wasn't part of that "we" one of the few benefits of age is perspective [...]
Content analysis details: (6.1 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.0 RCVD_FROM_SECONDARY Went through secondary MX record 0.1 TW_VT BODY: Odd Letter Triples with VT 5.4 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% [score: 1.0000] -0.4 AWL AWL: Auto-whitelist adjustment
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 13:48 -1000, Randy Bush wrote:
i have plonked all mail from vianetworks.co.uk. if they ever get a clue and have something useful to say, someone please tell me.
Ah, thus I was not the only one getting those silly "you are spamming" replies, then again if you look at their Bayesian filter:
pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.0 RCVD_FROM_SECONDARY Went through secondary MX record 0.1 TW_VT BODY: Odd Letter Triples with VT 5.4 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% [score: 1.0000] -0.4 AWL AWL: Auto-whitelist adjustment
Indeed... those folks will not get much mail. I mean if this ML result in 99% spam probability, ouch ;) Greets, Jeroen (And yes, I already send a message to address-policy-wg-owner@ripe.net and also one to ops@ripe.net with the content that they might want to throw that subscriber from the list...)
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:51:11AM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
(And yes, I already send a message to address-policy-wg-owner@ripe.net and also one to ops@ripe.net with the content that they might want to throw that subscriber from the list...)
Me too, to address-policy-wg-owner on 24th of march... looks like this is a /dev/null address. Regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
participants (3)
-
Daniel Roesen
-
Jeroen Massar
-
Randy Bush