On 1/16/2008 8:25 AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> L Smith wrote on 01/15/2008 10:39:28 PM:
>
>> The administrator on the receiving end said is to do with the "reply to
>> address" that is preventing the email coming through. Meaning the reply
> to
>> address must come from a genuine path and not an alias.
>
> How is [log in to unmask] (using the example of this list) not
> "a genuine path"?  Emails sent to it are delivered to the correct
> mailbox/process and handled according to the rules of that
> mailbox/process.  How would they know that my address, wbrown AT-SIGN
> e1b.org, is a "genuine path, and not an alias"?  For all they know, it
> could be and they would never be able to tell.
>
> It would be interesting to know which spam filter they are using.
>

The entire explanation sounds bogus. I suspect that someone somewhere in
the communications chain misunderstood and/or misinterpreted something.

--
Paul Russell, Senior Systems Administrator
OIT Messaging Services Team
University of Notre Dame
[log in to unmask]