Re: SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and open relays
Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com> Sat, 25 June 2005 21:57 UTC
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DmIeC-0000bv-QM; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:57:08 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DmIeA-0000aC-Nx for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:57:06 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA09897 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:57:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mtagate3.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.136]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DmJ2z-0001js-FQ for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 18:22:45 -0400
Received: from d06nrmr1407.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06nrmr1407.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.38.185]) by mtagate3.uk.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j5PLuvGM361122 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:56:57 GMT
Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.228]) by d06nrmr1407.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id j5PLuvhU289862 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:56:57 +0100
Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j5PLuvmp020237 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:56:57 +0100
Received: from sihl.zurich.ibm.com (sihl.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.16.232]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j5PLuuYq020234 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:56:57 +0100
Received: from zurich.ibm.com (sig-9-145-135-100.de.ibm.com [9.145.135.100]) by sihl.zurich.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA47418 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 23:56:55 +0200
Message-ID: <42BDD327.2070509@zurich.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 23:56:55 +0200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>
Organization: IBM
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113
X-Accept-Language: en, fr, de
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0506241722160.32315-100000@cirrus.av8.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0506241722160.32315-100000@cirrus.av8.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and open relays
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
> **** is a documented liar, and ****'s associate **** > (formerly of ****) has been proven in court to be a liar on 3 separate > court cases. And ****'s only regret in those cases is that he told the > court the truth when asked if he had subscribers. **** was shut for > contempt of court when **** published his blacklist instead of complying > with a court order to remove false entries. You should review > http://www.****.org, although it is not complete. This sort of assertion really has no place on an IETF list, regardless of whether it's true. It's as ad hominem as you can get, and that isn't how we debate here. Facts yes, people no. Thanks Brian _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Nicholas Staff
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Dean Anderson
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Dave Crocker
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Dean Anderson
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Tony Finch
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Dean Anderson
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Nicholas Staff
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Dave Crocker
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Nicholas Staff
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Nicholas Staff
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Bill Sommerfeld
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Carl Hutzler
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Nicholas Staff
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Nicholas Staff
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Dean Anderson
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Dean Anderson
- Re: Last Call: 'Email Submission Between Independ… Doug Royer
- SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and ope… Dean Anderson
- Re: SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and… Doug Royer
- Re: SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and… Dean Anderson
- Re: SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and… Dean Anderson
- Re: SpamOps claims about Email Authentication and… Dean Anderson