On 07/07/2017 05:39 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
urirhssub URIBL_IVMRHSBL uri.invaluement.com. A 127.0.0.2
tflags URIBL_IVMRHSBL net
score URIBL_IVMRHSBL 3.2
I did not have this one or the reuse line. Is that "right-hand-side"?
Do you have one such example?
header RCVD_IN_IVMBL
eval:check_rbl('ivmbl-lastexternal','sip.invaluement.com')
tflags RCVD_IN_IVMBL net
score RCVD_IN_IVMBL 4.2
header RCVD_IN_IVM24BL
eval:check_rbl('ivm24bl-lastexternal','sip24.invaluement.com')
tflags RCVD_IN_IVM24BL net
score RCVD_IN_IVM24BL 3.2
I also had both of these as
check_rbl('ivmSIP-lastexternal','sip.invaluement.com') and
check_rbl('ivmSIP-lastexternal",'sip24.invaluement.com')
(first argument same for both)
Ummm. Well. I don't have any hits on that RHSBL rule in the past 2
weeks so maybe that is not a valid rule. Ignore that one. I think I
will take it out of my ivm.cf file.
To all, please don't setup these rules and flood the IVM DNS servers
with requests. IVM is a private RBL feed (not very expensive) so you
should have a local rbldnsd instance with the DNS servers that the mail
filtering servers point to serving invaluement.com authoritatively.
Sorry Rob if we cause problems with your DNS servers accidentally by
posting these rules.
--
David Jones
