>> I wasn't even aware that this notfirsthop argument existed; as far as I
can
>> tell in a few minutes of testing, the argument has no effect.
>> I've had to disable all dynamic-IP RBLs because of this problem...
> Out of curiosity, what method do you use to feed your email into
> SpamAssassin? D
> On 2003-10-16, Brian Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you check the rule itself in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf you'll notice the
> > -notfirsthop part of the argument to check_rbl_txt(). This tells
> > SpamAssassin to check all hops except the first one for this match. As
a
>
> I wasn't even
* Daniel M. Drucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-18 09:38]:
> Is there a way to discover what SA currently treats as trusted?
Yes, running with debug (-D) switch turn on.
Received.pm:
dbg ("received-header: relay ".$relay->{ip}." trusted? ".
($in_trusted ? "yes" : "no"))
> At 03:10 PM 10/16/2003, Daniel M. Drucker wrote:
> >I wasn't even aware that this notfirsthop argument existed; as far as
> >I can tell in a few minutes of testing, the argument has no effect.
> >I've had to disable all dynamic-IP RBLs because of this problem...
>
> Dan.. Are you using an interna
At 03:10 PM 10/16/2003, Daniel M. Drucker wrote:
I wasn't even aware that this notfirsthop argument existed; as far as
I can tell in a few minutes of testing, the argument has no effect.
I've had to disable all dynamic-IP RBLs because of this problem...
Dan.. Are you using an internal mailserver wi
] Re: RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK
On 2003-10-16, Brian Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you check the rule itself in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf you'll notice the
> -notfirsthop part of the argument to check_rbl_txt(). This tells
> SpamAssassin to check all hops except the first one for
On 2003-10-16, Brian Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you check the rule itself in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf you'll notice the
> -notfirsthop part of the argument to check_rbl_txt(). This tells
> SpamAssassin to check all hops except the first one for this match. As a
I wasn't even aware that thi
