Great points - my view from earlier was that it really isn’t the
registrar’s job to make sure someone’s doing is cfg’d properly. I
would much rather have the registrar take a more hand-off approach to
configuring domains rather than the alternative. Just imagine
registrars who try and poke th
>> That aside, IMHO, this is a huge screw-up for SC - not even in the
>> realm of acceptable…
>
> On the other hand, why did the domain registrar put a blanket entry for
> *.spamcop.net pointing to their server's IP when the domain expired instead of
> just returning NXDOMAIN?
Because you can't m
On the other hand, why did the domain registrar put a blanket entry
for
*.spamcop.net pointing to their server's IP when the domain expired
instead of
just returning NXDOMAIN?
Well, this could also have been a screw-up by SC and if so, I would view
that as merely part of the same set of mista
Dnia 1.02.2021 o godz. 20:31:51 Antonio Leding pisze:
>
> That aside, IMHO, this is a huge screw-up for SC - not even in the
> realm of acceptable…
On the other hand, why did the domain registrar put a blanket entry for
*.spamcop.net pointing to their server's IP when the domain expired instead
>> Given the ip 1.2.3.4 - if postfix is configured to query the spamcop
>> blacklist then a dns query like this is issued:
>>
>> [gerry@noc ~]$ dig 4.3.2.1.bl.spamcop.net
>> [...]
>> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
>> 4.3.2.1.bl.spamcop.net. 300 IN A 91.195.240.87
>
> But isn't this a comm
On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 06:26:06PM -0500, vi...@vheuser.com wrote:
> Something's amiss...
> First time in 10 years I've gotten this:
>
> "An error occurred while processing your request.
> Reference #30.24721cb8.1612134453.1a374d81"
>
> from here:?? https://www.spamcop.net/
>
> Something has
Jaroslaw Rafa:
> Dnia 31.01.2021 o godz. 17:00:50 Gerald Galster pisze:
> >
> > Given the ip 1.2.3.4 - if postfix is configured to query the spamcop
> > blacklist then a dns query like this is issued:
> >
> > [gerry@noc ~]$ dig 4.3.2.1.bl.spamcop.net
> > [...]
> > ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> > 4.3.2.1.b
Dnia 31.01.2021 o godz. 17:00:50 Gerald Galster pisze:
>
> Given the ip 1.2.3.4 - if postfix is configured to query the spamcop
> blacklist then a dns query like this is issued:
>
> [gerry@noc ~]$ dig 4.3.2.1.bl.spamcop.net
> [...]
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> 4.3.2.1.bl.spamcop.net. 300 IN
Something's amiss...
First time in 10 years I've gotten this:
"An error occurred while processing your request.
Reference #30.24721cb8.1612134453.1a374d81"
from here: https://www.spamcop.net/
Something has changed.
On 2021/01/31 11:13 AM, Gerald Galster wrote:
Good news, the namese
Good news, the nameservers have changed again:
[gerry@noc ~]$ whois spamcop.net
Domain Name: SPAMCOP.NET
Registry Domain ID: 3340109_DOMAIN_NET-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.enom.com
Registrar URL: http://www.enom.com
Updated Date: 2021-01-31T16:04:06Z
Creation Date: 1999-01
Hello Ludi,
> But if spamcop.net is still intact, how can someone grab bl.spamcop.net?
it does not matter if spamcop servers are up and running, the problem is
that the responsible dns-servers do not answer with the spamcop servers'
ips anymore. Now the ip of a website belonging to a domain broke
11 matches
Mail list logo
