On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 10:36:17AM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Thursday, March 31, 2016 9:15 PM -0400 Wietse Venema
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>Is this a known issue with Barracuda? Anyone have an idea how to work
> >>around this? Clearly having their spam appliance be non-functional
> >>isn't a great start. ;)
> >
> >Running Postscreen after a spam appliance is pointless. It is a
> >spambot detector (in more sophisticated words, it implements IP
> >address-based reputation).
>
> Ok. But I still would like to know where in the stack the problem is. Right
> now, they are simply testing a release candidate in their existing setup
> (where postscreen did not previously exist). As soon as postscreen is
> introduced, things break. That seems problematic, particularly given that
> the default actions for postscreen are all set to ignore. I.e., I would
> assume (apparently incorrectly), that there should be no behavior changes if
> postscreen is set to not take any actions. And yet, here we see a
> significant behavior change.
Well, IIRC, based on your previous post the Barracude is an early
talker.
Postscreen's banner is:
220-<first line>
<brief delay>
200 <second line>
If the Barracuda sends EHLO during the "brief delay", it is in
violation of the SMTP spec.
--
Viktor.
