On 17.05.14 14:11, Jeff Mincy wrote:
>It would have been easier to figure out why it was matching if the
>matching spf entry was printed out, for example something like this:
>
>May 8 18:21:27.859 [22058] dbg: spf: whitelist_from_spf:
amandarodriq...@odysseyshop.ribsbuy.com matches ^.*\@.*buy\.c
From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 15:44:30 +0200
> On 17.05.14 14:11, Jeff Mincy wrote:
> >It would have been easier to figure out why it was matching if the
> >matching spf entry was printed out, for example something like this:
> >
> >May 8 18:21:27.85
That's a bad thing to do. A caching name server is pretty easy to implement
(all the distros that I've played with do it automatically just installing
bind). Many (most?/all?) RBLs require a subscription (read money) if you
exceed a certain number of queries. A public dns server can hammer th
On Mon, 19 May 2014, Kevin Miller wrote:
That's a bad thing to do. A caching name server is pretty easy to
implement (all the distros that I've played with do it automatically
just installing bind). Many (most?/all?) RBLs require a subscription
(read money) if you exceed a certain number of
On Mon, 19 May 2014 10:46:25 -0800
Kevin Miller wrote:
Ian> Excellent point. I _used to_ run a local DNS cache, but got rid of
Ian> it a few months ago, in the name of simplicity. Was that a good or
Ian> bad thing to do in the current context?
Kevin> That's a bad thing to do. A caching name s
On 2014-05-19 19:39, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
Ok, I installed a local bind instance on Saturday. But it is not
helping: out of about 100 spams I got today (counting both those that
got flagged and those that didn't, but not counting the "horrible" spams
with score > 15 that go directly to /dev/null)
On 19.05.14 11:06, Jeff Mincy wrote:
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 11:06:24 -0400
From: Jeff Mincy
To: Matus UHLAR - fantomas
please, avoid personal replies.
I am not subscribed to mailing list to get personal mail from people there.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantom
