On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 00:35 -0400, Alex wrote:
> > > We _really_ need to change that rule's description...
> >
> > Uhm, while I would never argue that naming to be unfortunate in
> > hindsight, despite most of the time actually matching its stated goal...
> >
> > I blame this one on Alex (the other
Hi,
>> We _really_ need to change that rule's description...
>
> Uhm, while I would never argue that naming to be unfortunate in
> hindsight, despite most of the time actually matching its stated goal...
>
> I blame this one on Alex (the otherwise anonymous $mysqlstudent). He's
> been around long
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 13:09 -0700, John Hardin wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> > AWL is NOT an 'auto whitelist'. and is not used by default configs anymore.
> > instead of including the massive volume of documentation on what AWL is and
> > is not, just google.
>
> We _r
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 13:16 -0700, John Hardin wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Your MUA still can't handle UTF-8, eh? Fixed my name. ;)
> > If there really is no way to use whitelist_from_rcvd, you of course
> > always can write custom header rules, matching against the ps
David B Funk wrote:
Notice also that the rule checks the header From:, not the envelope,
and they could be different.
When did that change?
Sorry. I am wrong.
Joseph Brennan
Columbia University Information Technology
On 2010-10-05 22:16, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Karsten Br�ckelmann wrote:
If there really is no way to use whitelist_from_rcvd, you of course
always can write custom header rules, matching against the pseudo header
X-Spam-Relays-Internal or friends, carefully constructing the RE to
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Karsten Br?ckelmann wrote:
If there really is no way to use whitelist_from_rcvd, you of course
always can write custom header rules, matching against the pseudo header
X-Spam-Relays-Internal or friends, carefully constructing the RE to
match a specific Received header by cons
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 10/5/10 10:40 AM, Alex wrote:
* 0.7 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
AWL is NOT an 'auto whitelist'. and is not used by default configs anymore.
instead of including the massive volume of documentation on what AWL
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Joseph Brennan wrote:
>
> --On Tuesday, October 5, 2010 10:40 -0400 Alex
> wrote:
>
> > I have an email that I'm trying to whitelist using whitelist_from_rcvd
> > and it's not working as I expect. I've created an entry:
> >
[snip..]
>
> Notice also that the rule checks the hea
Hi,
>> $ host 209.16.192.170
>> 170.192.16.209.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer Lanyon.com.
>
> but they don't match:
> host Lanyon.com
> Lanyon.com has address 97.74.177.132
>
> 97.74.177.132
> 132.177.74.97.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer
> ip-97-74-177-132.ip.secureserver.net.
Ah, right, I se
On 10/5/10 12:45 PM, Alex wrote:
$ host 209.16.192.170
170.192.16.209.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer Lanyon.com.
but they don't match:
host Lanyon.com
Lanyon.com has address 97.74.177.132
97.74.177.132
132.177.74.97.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer
ip-97-74-177-132.ip.secureserver.net.
wh
Hi,
>> $ host S253906HZ1EW06.usstls6-hosting.savvis.net
>> Host S253906HZ1EW06.usstls6-hosting.savvis.net not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
>
> Err, you're doing rDNS lookup for the connecting host's IP, not the
> rather arbitrary HELO as you just did.
Okay, understood. I'm able to resolve that IP, though:
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 11:51 -0400, Alex wrote:
> > As the documentation [1] clearly states, the second value (a) is a
> > string matched against the relay's rDNS in the Received headers, and
> > (b) it is your MX's responsibility to perform the rDNS lookup and add it
> > to the header.
> > $ hos
Hi,
>> X-Envelope-From:
>> Received: from S253906HZ1EW06.usstls6-hosting.savvis.net (unknown
>> [209.16.192.170])
>>
>> Is it because there is no reverse DNS entry?
>
> As the documentation [1] clearly states, the second value (a) is a
> string matched against the relay's rDNS in the Received he
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 10:40 -0400, Alex wrote:
> I have an email that I'm trying to whitelist using whitelist_from_rcvd
> and it's not working as I expect. I've created an entry:
>
> whitelist_from_rcvd u...@lanyon.com savvis.net
>
> Here is the corresponding received header:
>
> X-Envelope-From
--On Tuesday, October 5, 2010 10:40 -0400 Alex
wrote:
I have an email that I'm trying to whitelist using whitelist_from_rcvd
and it's not working as I expect. I've created an entry:
whitelist_from_rcvd u...@lanyon.com savvis.net
Here is the corresponding received header:
X-Envelope-From:
On 10/5/10 10:40 AM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I have an email that I'm trying to whitelist using whitelist_from_rcvd
and it's not working as I expect. I've created an entry:
whitelist_from_rcvd u...@lanyon.com savvis.net
Here is the corresponding received header:
X-Envelope-From:
Received: from S2539
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 10:40:07 -0400
Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have an email that I'm trying to whitelist using whitelist_from_rcvd
> and it's not working as I expect. I've created an entry:
>
>...
>
> Is it because there is no reverse DNS entry?
Yes. It would be nice to have the option look it up
Hi,
I have an email that I'm trying to whitelist using whitelist_from_rcvd
and it's not working as I expect. I've created an entry:
whitelist_from_rcvd u...@lanyon.com savvis.net
Here is the corresponding received header:
X-Envelope-From:
Received: from S253906HZ1EW06.usstls6-hosting.savvis.ne
19 matches
Mail list logo
