-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Sean Doherty writes: > On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 19:28, Justin Mason wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > Jim Maul writes: > > > This is exactly how i have my system setup. I have a 192.168 IP > > > assigned to my server. It has no public IP assigned to it. However, i > > > have a router/firewall in front of it which has a public ip assigned to > > > its wan interface which then does NAT/port forwarding to my qmail > > > server. It works extremely well for our purposes. It sounds to me that > > > if i upgraded to 3.0 (still running 2.64) i would then have the same > > > issue with the trusted networks. It doesnt really sound correct. Just > > > because my machine doesnt have a public ip does NOT mean that mail > > > passes through a trusted source first..unless you are calling my little > > > SMC barricade a trusted source. > > > > there's a very easy way to deal with this, and it's what you should > > use. set trusted_networks. That's exactly why there's a parameter > > there to set ;) > > > Basically, SpamAssassin can't know all about your network setup unless > > you tell it. it'll try to guess, but there's only so far guessing > > will go, and without information from you, it's pretty much impossible > > to guess this. > > So shouldn't SpamAssassin take a conservative approach when guessing, > and advising via the debug output that the user should set > trusted_networks. probably. it's documented all over the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf man page and the UPGRADE file... - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFBh8QDMJF5cimLx9ARAiy4AJsFLDp/D0Di13xZlIh6OJ+S1WXyGgCgq9mN DIAZkF9PYi/Ki/YZy5oWQLM= =kzbp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
