<p>Yes, but my procedural, or rather ... political... response was given after the technical solution was done, so to speak, and I thought this needed saying as well.<br>
I'm glad you see things the same way, and wish you the beest of luck with the slow grinding pace of large company machinery! The larger the corporation is, the more idiotic they tend to be... Often thinking they are above things like this (and can make their own rules, kind of). Had a similar situation the other day, where some really harsh (and... informed...:-) words were needed, before they agreed to do things my way... Er, the right way, I mean...:-D </p>
<p>Anyway, best of luvk&cheers!<br>
-- <br>
-- Glenn</p>
<p><blockquote type="cite">Den 18 dec 2010 16.04, "Mike Tremaine" <<a href="mailto:mgt@stellarcore.net">mgt@stellarcore.net</a>> skrev:<br><br><p><font color="#500050"><br>> On 12/17/2010 12:10 PM, Glenn Steen wrote:<br>
>> I absolutely hate that "brush it under the rug" rea...</font></p>I also agree, but here we have a technical question and a procedural response. I did infact do these things first but the wheels of the these large orginazations move very slowly and I had to take steps to protect the mail server, right now. The answer to my question was indeed DISCARD or REJECT works fine.<br>
<br>
Thank you for all the comments and feedback.<br>
<p><font color="#500050"><br>-Mike<br><br><br>-- <br>MailScanner mailing list<br><a href="mailto:mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info</a><br><a href="http://lists.mailscanner.in.">http://lists.mailscanner.in.</a>..</font></p>
</blockquote></p>