Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-29 Thread List Mail User
>... >mouss wrote: >> Matt Kettler wrote: >>> While daryl's comment here isn't entirely on the mark, it is close. >>> Daryl, read the docs closer. SA does accept this format. >>> >>> Stephan, If you want to do an implied mask to cover a whole, you MUST >>> end in a . ie: you must use "10." not "10

Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-29 Thread mouss
Matt Kettler wrote: In "old practice", 10.1=10.0.0.1 (a.b = 256^3 * a + b), and not 10.1.0.0. Really? That's a new one by me. This is a (deprecated?) BSD practice. it was coded in inet_addr.c and was thus imported by many systems. # ping 127.1 PING localhost (127.0.0.1): 56 data bytes 6

Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-29 Thread Matt Kettler
mouss wrote: > Matt Kettler wrote: >> While daryl's comment here isn't entirely on the mark, it is close. >> Daryl, read the docs closer. SA does accept this format. >> >> Stephan, If you want to do an implied mask to cover a whole, you MUST >> end in a . ie: you must use "10." not "10". If you fa

Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-28 Thread Stephan Menzel
Am Mittwoch, 29. März 2006 09:20 schrieb mouss: > This somewhat defeats the "minimum surprise" principle. > > In "old practice", 10.1=10.0.0.1 (a.b = 256^3 * a + b), and not > 10.1.0.0. ping 127.1 still works on (some|most) platforms. (telnet 127.1 > works less). > > > Wouldn't it be better to jus

Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-28 Thread Stephan Menzel
Am Mittwoch, 29. März 2006 05:12 schrieb Matt Kettler: > Stephan, If you want to do an implied mask to cover a whole, you MUST > end in a . ie: you must use "10." not "10". If you fail to include a > trailing dot, SA will expand with zeros, but it will treat it as a > single IP address, not a rang

Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-28 Thread mouss
Matt Kettler wrote: While daryl's comment here isn't entirely on the mark, it is close. Daryl, read the docs closer. SA does accept this format. Stephan, If you want to do an implied mask to cover a whole, you MUST end in a . ie: you must use "10." not "10". If you fail to include a trailing do

Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-28 Thread Matt Kettler
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: > Stephan Menzel wrote: >> Hi there, >> >> I'm currently about to customize a local (gentoo~) 3.1 installation >> to our specific needs. >> One of the first steps there was a special regex to catch our very >> own Received: headers >> >> To check if this works I modified s

Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-28 Thread Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Stephan Menzel wrote: Hi there, I'm currently about to customize a local (gentoo~) 3.1 installation to our specific needs. One of the first steps there was a special regex to catch our very own Received: headers To check if this works I modified some other SA code parts and enabled debug ou

Re: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-28 Thread Stephan Menzel
Am Dienstag, 28. März 2006 16:40 schrieb Bowie Bailey: > > [32116] dbg: received-header: relay 10.1.76.29 trusted? no internal? > > no > > Ok. Show us the entire debug section where it parses the headers. > Keep in mind that the interpretation of each header is influenced by > the headers that pre

RE: Trusted or internal networks not recognized

2006-03-28 Thread Bowie Bailey
Stephan Menzel wrote: > > /etc/spamassassin/local.cf > > ---snip--- > clear_trusted_networks > trusted_networks 127.0.0 192.168 10 ... more networks to come here > > clear_internal_networks > internal_networks 10.1.71.0/24 10.1.3.0/24 10.1.76.29/24 ... here too > ---snip--- Looks good so far.