On 1/15/19 8:02 PM, David B Funk wrote:
It's a bit tricky to implement a milter correctly because people often
don't understand that the message which sendmail hands to a milter is
as-received from the incoming network connection.
Any locally added stuff (EG the "Received:" header) isn't in th
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019, Bill Cole wrote:
On 15 Jan 2019, at 15:05, Grant Taylor wrote:
I will investigate to see if spamass-milter can fabricate a satisfactory
Received: header.
A quick look at the issue tracker for it implies that it does so. A milter that
actually works with SA really needs
On 15 Jan 2019, at 15:05, Grant Taylor wrote:
> I will investigate to see if spamass-milter can fabricate a satisfactory
> Received: header.
A quick look at the issue tracker for it implies that it does so. A milter that
actually works with SA really needs to.
Unfortunately, it is a nuisance t
On 01/15/2019 12:59 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
There are at many different milters that can use SpamAssassin listed at
https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/IntegratedInMta#Integrated_into_Sendmail.
Some links there may be dead.
I am using spamass-milter, and spfmilter, both connected to Sendmail.
On 15 Jan 2019, at 14:24, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 01/15/2019 11:39 AM, Bill Cole wrote:
>> This strikes me as a flaw in whatever milter you're using. Some (e.g.
>> MIMEDefang) milters deal with the fact that they don't get a local Received
>> header by constructing one from what they know befor
On 01/15/2019 11:39 AM, Bill Cole wrote:
This strikes me as a flaw in whatever milter you're using. Some
(e.g. MIMEDefang) milters deal with the fact that they don't get a local
Received header by constructing one from what they know before passing
the message to SA.
The SPF milter is constru
On 15 Jan 2019, at 12:15, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 01/15/2019 09:24 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>> What is your glue for SA? Is it getting the received header you are
>> expecting in time for the parsing?
>
> Both SA and my spfmilter are are milters on the same inbound Internet edge
> MTA.
>
>
On 01/15/2019 09:24 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
What is your glue for SA? Is it getting the received header you are
expecting in time for the parsing?
Both SA and my spfmilter are are milters on the same inbound Internet
edge MTA.
I will have to research to see if the header is added by the
On 01/15/2019 09:36 AM, Bill Cole wrote:
Check both the contents and documentation of trusted_networks,
msa_networks, and internal_networks.
Will do.
If SA thinks a prior hop is through a machine that writes trustworthy
Received headers and is a normal part of your relay path, it will check
On 15 Jan 2019, at 11:08, Grant Taylor wrote:
Does anybody know off the top of their head—don't dig, I'll do that
later—what might cause SpamAssassin to apply SPF processing to
earlier Received: headers (lower in the message source)?
Check both the contents and documentation of trusted_networ
Does anybody know off the top of their head—don't dig, I'll do that
later—what might cause SpamAssassin to apply SPF processing to earlier
Received: headers (lower in the message source)?
I'm seeing SpamAssassin claim that a message failed SPF processing based
on chronologically earlier intern
11 matches
Mail list logo
