Hi Tomasz,
can you explain why it's better to turn off QNAME minimization MTAs and
spam checkers?
Andreas
Am 14.01.2025 um 18:56 schrieb Steffan Cline via Postfix-users:
Just FYI, it's better to turn off QNAME minimization on DNS servers used by
MTAs and spam checkers.
My NSes are using 9.11 and I don't have that QNAME-minimization option
available in my config however looking at tcpdump, it doesn't look as if it's
minimizing it.
I plan to upgrade my NS soon but need a few days for that.
Is that a show stopper?
Thank you,
Steffan Cline
stef...@hldns.com <mailto:stef...@hldns.com>
602-793-0014
On 1/14/25, 3:30 AM, "Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users"
<postfix-users@postfix.org <mailto:postfix-users@postfix.org>> wrote:
On 2025-01-13 17:41, Steffan Cline via Postfix-users wrote:
reject_rhsbl_sender mykey.dbl.dq.spamhaus.net=127.0.1.[2..99], ^^^^^
On 13.01.25 22:08, Tomasz Pala via Postfix-users wrote:
BTW you can use DQS via public resolvers just fine - although it's
better to use own DNS with QNAME-minimization turned off.
Just FYI, it's better to turn off QNAME minimization on DNS servers used by
MTAs and spam checkers.
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
