Jo Rhett wrote:
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>> Jo Rhett wrote:
>>> You're still babbling about NAT. I could care less about NAT. All
>>> trusted breaks for EVERYONE, and EVERYONE ends up hardcoding
>>> trusted_networks because auto detection is completely and utterly
>>> broken.
>>
>> Fine.. We'll ignore NAT. It's not your problem, I get it.
>>
>> YOUR network is broken because YOUR network doesn't add Received:
>> headers before calling SA.. That's not EVERYONE, that's YOU.
>>
>> Get your tools to add a local Received: header before you call SA, the
>> auto-detection code will start working.
>>
>> After all, if you haven't Received: the message yet, how'd it get to SA?
>> Do your really expect SA to work on a message that doesn't even appear
>> to have been delivered to your domain yet?
>
> As mentioned in my previous message, I have dozens of messages here
> that have as many as 12 received headers.
Yes, but none are LOCAL.
> So perhaps I didn't get the Received header that will be added by this
> host.
Yeah, so how did it get to SA? That's the problem. How can SA be
scanning it, if it hasn't reached this host yet?
> What kind of logic says that it should trust a remote IP from a very
> random source that isn't authenticated by a local header?
Because it's equally absurd to assume that the most recent header isn't
local.
