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]