Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-12 Thread Steve Jenkins
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 4:30 AM, @lbutlr wrote: > > > On Apr 10, 2016, at 5:37 PM, Curtis Villamizar > wrote: > > > > In message > > "@lbutlr" writes: > >> > >> On Apr 10, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Curtis Villamizar = > >> wrote: > >>> postscreen_dnsbl_sites =3D > >>> list.dnswl.org*-5 > >>>

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-12 Thread @lbutlr
> On Apr 10, 2016, at 5:37 PM, Curtis Villamizar > wrote: > > In message > "@lbutlr" writes: >> >> On Apr 10, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Curtis Villamizar = >> wrote: >>> postscreen_dnsbl_sites =3D >>> list.dnswl.org*-5 >>> # followed by some blacklist sites >> >> It was my understanding th

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-11 Thread Wietse Venema
Curtis Villamizar: > btw- I don't think list.dnswl.org is a viable workaround for the post > 220 problem. This just affects the dnsbl score which would already be > zero. The post 220 checks would still be run before putting the gmail > server IP into the temporary whitelist. Manual maintenance

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread Peter
On 11/04/16 11:37, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > btw- I don't think list.dnswl.org is a viable workaround for the post > 220 problem. This just affects the dnsbl score which would already be > zero. The post 220 checks would still be run before putting the gmail > server IP into the temporary whitel

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread Curtis Villamizar
In message "@lbutlr" writes: > > On Apr 10, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Curtis Villamizar = > wrote: > > postscreen_dnsbl_sites =3D > > list.dnswl.org*-5 > > # followed by some blacklist sites > > It was my understanding that eh the order of test said not matter > because all the dnsbls list

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread Wietse Venema
@lbutlr: > On Apr 10, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Curtis Villamizar = > wrote: > > postscreen_dnsbl_sites =3D > > list.dnswl.org*-5 > > # followed by some blacklist sites > > It was my understanding that eh the order of test said not matter = > because all the dnsbls listed would be checked, a

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread @lbutlr
On Apr 10, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > postscreen_dnsbl_sites = > list.dnswl.org*-5 > # followed by some blacklist sites It was my understanding that eh the order of test said not matter because all the dnsbls listed would be checked, a final score computed, and the

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread Curtis Villamizar
In message <570a341b.9000...@pajamian.dhs.org> Peter writes: > > On 10/04/16 15:00, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > > This is a workaround that shouldn't be needed. > > > > Any idea what the cause of this is? So far no legit mail except gmail > > gets caught here. > > gmail uses hundreds, or thousa

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread Curtis Villamizar
In message <3qjz5d5s15zj...@spike.porcupine.org> Wietse Venema writes: > > Curtis Villamizar: > > Since I enabled postscreen (with soft_bounce=yes in master.cf) I was > > getting logs of this form: > > > > Apr 9 01:08:12 mta1 postfix/postscreen[18326]: > > NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from [2607:f8b0

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread Wietse Venema
Curtis Villamizar: > Since I enabled postscreen (with soft_bounce=yes in master.cf) I was > getting logs of this form: > > Apr 9 01:08:12 mta1 postfix/postscreen[18326]: > NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from [2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22d]:32999: > 450 4.3.2 Service currently unavailable; > from=, to=, >

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread Bastian Blank
On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 11:00:53PM -0400, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > Any idea what the cause of this is? So far no legit mail except gmail > gets caught here. Don't use after-greeting tests in postscreen. The postscreen documentation explains exactly why this happens. Bastian -- "What

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-10 Thread Peter
On 10/04/16 15:00, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > This is a workaround that shouldn't be needed. > > Any idea what the cause of this is? So far no legit mail except gmail > gets caught here. gmail uses hundreds, or thousands of MTAs and has the unique property that when they retry after a deferral i

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-09 Thread Curtis Villamizar
In message <5709c8c8.1050...@megan.vbhcs.org> Noel Jones writes: > On 4/9/2016 10:00 PM, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > > Since I enabled postscreen (with soft_bounce=yes in master.cf) I was > > getting logs of this form: > > > > Apr 9 01:08:12 mta1 postfix/postscreen[18326]: > > NOQUEUE: reject:

Re: gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-09 Thread Noel Jones
On 4/9/2016 10:00 PM, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > Since I enabled postscreen (with soft_bounce=yes in master.cf) I was > getting logs of this form: > > Apr 9 01:08:12 mta1 postfix/postscreen[18326]: > NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from [2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22d]:32999: > 450 4.3.2 Service currently una

gmail servers requiring postscreen_access whitelisting

2016-04-09 Thread Curtis Villamizar
Since I enabled postscreen (with soft_bounce=yes in master.cf) I was getting logs of this form: Apr 9 01:08:12 mta1 postfix/postscreen[18326]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from [2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22d]:32999: 450 4.3.2 Service currently unavailable; from=, to=, proto=ESMTP, helo= linefeeds add