Thank you both, please stop this pissing contest.
On 24-11-15 12:35, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 24.11.2015 um 12:29 schrieb Benny Pedersen: >> Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-11-24 11:56: >> >>> it's the exim of the ISP >> >> with old version of exim > > it's still the exim of the ISP > >>> it's the exim of the ISP >> >> with old version of exim > > it's still the exim of the ISP > >>>> again disable of rdns_none is not the solution, so why fokus on that? >>> >>> because *it is* the solution damned when "make spamassassin exceptions >>> for the faulty isp headers" would do exactly the same, not fire the >>> rule and since it affects *every* mail, well disable it >> >> no isp might recieve mail from more then one single ip / domains, so >> solve rdns_none with disable is incorrect with score 0 > > you really don't understand it - it don't matter from where the ISP > receives mail when the Received-header don't contain the reverse DNS in > general > >> if the 3 header exeption is added it would still work on other isps spam >> sources breaking rfc rules on how headers should be > > and how does that matter for a local setup using fetchmail from *that* ISP? > >>>> spamassasssin is not a single rule spam scanner / tagger >>> and hence you disable the rules which don't match your environment >> >> bah, upgrade exim is not that hard is it ? > > it's still the exim of the ISP - DAMNED - go out and update it, i wish > you success >
