Voytek Eymont wrote:
On Sat, October 4, 2008 1:03 am, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
That's STILL smtp rejection - he was thinking of using it from e.g.
SpamAssassin. But I personally think that dsn.rfc-ignorant.org is safe
for smtp rejection :)
thanks, Ralf
(after all, it was your suggestion from
On Sat, October 4, 2008 1:03 am, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> That's STILL smtp rejection - he was thinking of using it from e.g.
> SpamAssassin. But I personally think that dsn.rfc-ignorant.org is safe
> for smtp rejection :)
thanks, Ralf
(after all, it was your suggestion from
http://www.rfc-ig
Joey wrote:
* Voytek Eymont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
rfci is not safe for smtp rejection. It is not intended for such use.
mouss, thanks
so, should be like this ?
smtpd_sender_restrictions = reject_rhsbl_sender dsn.rfc-ignorant.org
That's STILL smtp rejection - he was thinking of using it from
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Voytek Eymont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
rfci is not safe for smtp rejection. It is not intended for such use.
mouss, thanks
so, should be like this ?
smtpd_sender_restrictions = reject_rhsbl_sender dsn.rfc-ignorant.org
That's STILL smtp rejection - he was thinking of
* Joey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > That's STILL smtp rejection - he was thinking of using it from e.g.
> > SpamAssassin. But I personally think that dsn.rfc-ignorant.org is safe
> > for smtp rejection :)
>
> We had a lot of problems when we used rfc-ignorant.org because of Exchange
> servers not be
>
> * Voytek Eymont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > > rfci is not safe for smtp rejection. It is not intended for such use.
> >
> >
> > mouss, thanks
> >
> > so, should be like this ?
> >
> > smtpd_sender_restrictions = reject_rhsbl_sender dsn.rfc-ignorant.org
>
> That's STILL smtp rejection - he was
* Voytek Eymont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > rfci is not safe for smtp rejection. It is not intended for such use.
>
>
> mouss, thanks
>
> so, should be like this ?
>
> smtpd_sender_restrictions = reject_rhsbl_sender dsn.rfc-ignorant.org
That's STILL smtp rejection - he was thinking of using it f
On Fri, October 3, 2008 11:36 pm, mouss wrote:
> Voytek Eymont wrote:
> rfci is not safe for smtp rejection. It is not intended for such use.
mouss, thanks
so, should be like this ?
smtpd_sender_restrictions = reject_rhsbl_sender dsn.rfc-ignorant.org
>> blocked using dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net (to
Voytek Eymont wrote:
On Fri, October 3, 2008 11:07 pm, Udo Rader wrote:
Joey schrieb:
I use in this order the following:
we use these:
blocked using bl.spamcop.net (total: 491)
blocked using combined.njabl.org (total: 77)
blocked using dsn.rfc-ignorant.org (total: 368)
rfci i
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 08:32:16AM -0400, Joey wrote:
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> I just updated my rbl list since dsbl.org is out and wanted to see if anyone
> has any new lists that are conservative enough to use in the war against
> spam.
>
Try barracuda, read the whole thread:
http://marc.info/
On Fri, October 3, 2008 11:07 pm, Udo Rader wrote:
> Joey schrieb:
>
>> I use in this order the following:
we use these:
blocked using bl.spamcop.net (total: 491)
blocked using combined.njabl.org (total: 77)
blocked using dsn.rfc-ignorant.org (total: 368)
blocked using dul.dnsbl
Joey schrieb:
I use in this order the following:
reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org,
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
for us bl.spamcop.net has produced quite a lot false positives in the
past, that's why we only use it for scoring, but things may have changed.
re
Hello All,
I just updated my rbl list since dsbl.org is out and wanted to see if anyone
has any new lists that are conservative enough to use in the war against
spam.
I use in this order the following:
reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org,
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
13 matches
Mail list logo
