Jeff wrote on 12/09/2006 04:57:51 PM:
> So, when my server sends e-mail, it uses "saber.nabs.net" as its
> "EHLO", and the connection comes from 71.246.216.107. "host
> saber.nabs.net" returns 71.246.216.107, which is the same IP that the
> connection comes from. So far, so good.
>
> But, "h
On 9 Dec 2006 at 15:16, John Rudd wrote:
> > So, I vote for any change to the Botnet code that ends up with my type
> > of situation (which is pretty much what Jan-Pieter was also describing)
> > not getting rejected.
> >
>
> Do you have a valid SPF record for your domain? One that says that
Jeff Rife wrote:
So, I vote for any change to the Botnet code that ends up with my type
of situation (which is pretty much what Jan-Pieter was also describing)
not getting rejected.
Do you have a valid SPF record for your domain? One that says that host
is the right one?
I'm thinking ab
On 7 Dec 2006 at 9:58, Jan-Pieter Cornet wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 11:32:57AM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> > Botnet looks to verify that:
> >
> > c) the hostname doesn't contain 2 or more octets of its IP address in
> > hex or decimal form
> > d) the hostname doesn't contain certain "client
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 03:16:53AM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> >If either the HELO or
> >the envelope sender domain points back at the sending IP, it is
> >also allowed. Unless, of course, either of those are generic rDNS
> >or [] bracketed IP constructs.
>
> If you can make the second part work (se
Jan-Pieter Cornet wrote:
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 11:32:57AM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
If either the HELO or
the envelope sender domain points back at the sending IP, it is
also allowed. Unless, of course, either of those are generic rDNS
or [] bracketed IP constructs.
If you can make the sec
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 11:32:57AM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> Botnet looks to verify that:
>
> a) the relay has a PTR record at all
> b) optional: the hostname in the PTR record resolves, and resolves back
> to the IP address that you're talking to
> c) the hostname doesn't contain 2 or more octet
John Rudd wrote:
> Michael Sims wrote:
>> John Rudd wrote:
>>> What exactly is it that you're trying to do?
>>
>> Get the PTR for the connecting relay, even if the forward and
>> reverse lookups don't match. Apparently $RelayHostname only
>> contains the PTR if they do match. Currently I'm check
Michael Sims wrote:
John Rudd wrote:
Michael Sims wrote:
No biggie, my Net::DNS solution is working fine so I'll stick with
that for now.
What exactly is it that you're trying to do?
Get the PTR for the connecting relay, even if the forward and reverse lookups
don't match. Apparently $Re
Jan-Pieter Cornet wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 02:51:22PM -0600, Michael Sims wrote:
>> Mike Lambert wrote:
>>> Michael Sims wrote:
Ah. So you're saying that sendmail doesn't provide the PTR record
to the milter unless it has verified that forward and reverse
match? That certain
John Rudd wrote:
> Michael Sims wrote:
>> No biggie, my Net::DNS solution is working fine so I'll stick with
>> that for now.
>
> What exactly is it that you're trying to do?
Get the PTR for the connecting relay, even if the forward and reverse lookups
don't match. Apparently $RelayHostname o
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 02:51:22PM -0600, Michael Sims wrote:
> Mike Lambert wrote:
> > Michael Sims wrote:
> >> Ah. So you're saying that sendmail doesn't provide the PTR record
> >> to the milter unless it has verified that forward and reverse match?
> >> That certainly seems to be what I'm seei
Michael Sims wrote:
No biggie, my Net::DNS solution is working fine so I'll stick with that for now.
What exactly is it that you're trying to do?
___
NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
message, it is NULL
Mike Lambert wrote:
> Michael Sims wrote:
>> Ah. So you're saying that sendmail doesn't provide the PTR record
>> to the milter unless it has verified that forward and reverse match?
>> That certainly seems to be what I'm seeing here.
>
> This feature may help (it works for access.db lookups):
>
14 matches
Mail list logo