Spam Filter ISP Forums : New Reject Code https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/ Sun, 15 Mar 2026 22:43:29 +0000 Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:56:22 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 11.04 360 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=6363 <![CDATA[Spam Filter ISP Forums]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_images/web_wiz_forums.png https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/ <![CDATA[New Reject Code : LogSat wrote:This one we...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11668&title=new-reject-code#11668 Author: mbrusl
Subject: 6363
Posted: 06 February 2008 at 12:56am

Originally posted by LogSat LogSat wrote:

This one we may actually have a problem implementing. Not because it's complicated (it's not....) but because we would risk breaking many applications/reports that various admins may have in place.

We may create some kind of setting that will allow you admins to choose if to change the ID for one of the two filters, we're brainstorming on how to proceed....


Could this be something that can be hashed out here with all the participating SF users.  Maybe sending out a blanketed email to the registered users to chime in on this one and have a real discussion to get this resolved.  My guess would be that as long as everyone knows about it, they would be in a better position to be ready for a possibly change when it happens.  As for maybe those that want to run it as a test first before implementing it into a production environment, I'd be willing to go that route.  Then if it doesn't work for a smooth transition, then we'd have our answer for sure.


]]> Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:56:22 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11668&title=new-reject-code#11668 <![CDATA[New Reject Code : Thanks. Let us know. ]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11658&title=new-reject-code#11658 Author: Desperado
Subject: 6363
Posted: 05 February 2008 at 11:39am

Thanks.  Let us know.]]> Tue, 05 Feb 2008 11:39:52 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11658&title=new-reject-code#11658 <![CDATA[New Reject Code : This one we may actually have...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11657&title=new-reject-code#11657 Author: LogSat
Subject: 6363
Posted: 04 February 2008 at 6:14pm

This one we may actually have a problem implementing. Not because it's complicated (it's not....) but because we would risk breaking many applications/reports that various admins may have in place.

We may create some kind of setting that will allow you admins to choose if to change the ID for one of the two filters, we're brainstorming on how to proceed....
]]> Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:14:04 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11657&title=new-reject-code#11657 <![CDATA[New Reject Code : AYE ]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11654&title=new-reject-code#11654 Author: IKILLSPAM1
Subject: 6363
Posted: 04 February 2008 at 3:49pm

AYE]]> Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:49:19 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11654&title=new-reject-code#11654 <![CDATA[New Reject Code : I will second that motion. It...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11607&title=new-reject-code#11607 Author: jerbo128
Subject: 6363
Posted: 23 January 2008 at 7:39pm

I will second that motion.  It would be very helpful to us also. 
 
Yes, we could go through the log files, but even with sawmill, processing 300-400MB of log files per day takes a long time.
 
So, PLEASE
 
All in favor - say AYE
 
Jeremy
]]> Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:39:39 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11607&title=new-reject-code#11607 <![CDATA[New Reject Code : OK ... I know this effects a lot...]]> https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11604&title=new-reject-code#11604 Author: Desperado
Subject: 6363
Posted: 23 January 2008 at 10:49am

OK ... I know this effects a lot of users custom apps but ... is it even remotely possible to break the Local IP Black List away from the MAPS rejection?  I have a custom rejection code just so my GUI can search in the "Rejection Details" field but this is not as efficient or easy as having it's own RejectID.  There are other small reasons that only apply to me but, even so.
 
ADDED:9:20PM:  My reject is "521 5.2 The IP ....."  That is how I can search for that exact "Cause".  However, I would still like to search for a Reject ID.
 
Any thoughts from anyone?


Edited by Desperado - 23 January 2008 at 9:21pm]]> Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:49:55 +0000 https://www.logsat.com/spamfilter/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6363&PID=11604&title=new-reject-code#11604