Le 28/05/2011 20:47, David Brown a écrit : > Hello Noel, yup, just in case someone sees this after Googling for a > similar issue: executing the rndc reload zone after updating the serial > number does wonders for your RBL (doh!). >
note that rbldnsd may be a better choice should your list grow... > > On Sat, 2011-05-28 at 12:57 -0500, Noel Jones wrote: >> On 5/28/2011 12:50 PM, David Brown wrote: >>> Hello Postfixers, attempting to get my postfix server in good shape I >>> read the Book of Postfix to help me resolve some key issues. >>> >>> Now, I implemented the use of the dnsbl per p. 98 in the Postfix book. >>> >>> On the postfix rbl list I included the now standard list of rbls >>> including spamcop and spamhaus. This part of the rbl works as expected. >>> I then included my own dnsbl defined in my BIND9 server and included in >>> the postfix config. >>> >>> The curious issue about using my own dnsbl is not all reversed IPs >>> resolve to 127.0.0.3 as expected since the target IP is definitely in >>> the range of IPs defined in the local dnsbl. >>> >>> This means running the host command with the reversed ip address with >>> the dnsbl hostname tacked onto the end may or may not resolve to >>> 127.0.0.3. Some IPs resolve correctly and some do not but both target IP >>> addresses have a range defined in the custom dnsbl. >>> >>> Example: >>> host 1.133.92.204.dnsbl.mydnsbl.tld >>> 1.133.92.204.dnsbl.mydnsbl.tld has address 127.0.0.3 >>> >>> host 1.73.75.217.dnsbl.mydnsbl.tld >>> Host 1.73.75.217.dnsbl.mydnsbl.tld not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) >>> >>> Yet both IP addresses referenced above reside within the same list. >>> >>> Has anyone seen this before? And, howto debug this situation? >>> >>> Please advise. >>> >>> >> >> This looks like a problem in your BIND9 dnsbl; nothing to do >> with postfix. >> >> If you need more help, try a BIND9 support forum. > >
