I'm running Postfix 2.11.7 on FreeBSD 10.2-RELEASE.
Just wanted to get folks' opinions/rationale/thoughts on behavior of some
of the RBL's.
Specifically SORBS.NET... I first set up my server using a popular FreeBSD
tutorial. SORBS.NET was included in a list of recommended RBL's in the
lates
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 01:47:28PM -0400, Fongaboo wrote:
>
> I'm running Postfix 2.11.7 on FreeBSD 10.2-RELEASE.
>
> Just wanted to get folks' opinions/rationale/thoughts on behavior of some of
> the RBL's.
>
> Specifically SORBS.NET... I first set up my server using a popular FreeBSD
> tutoria
> On Oct 3, 2016, at 10:47 AM, Fongaboo wrote:
>
>
> I'm running Postfix 2.11.7 on FreeBSD 10.2-RELEASE.
>
> Just wanted to get folks' opinions/rationale/thoughts on behavior of some of
> the RBL's.
>
> Specifically SORBS.NET... I first set up my server using a popular FreeBSD
> tutorial. S
Fongaboo:
>
> I'm running Postfix 2.11.7 on FreeBSD 10.2-RELEASE.
>
> Just wanted to get folks' opinions/rationale/thoughts on behavior of some
> of the RBL's.
>
> Specifically SORBS.NET... I first set up my server using a popular FreeBSD
> tutorial. SORBS.NET was included in a list of recomme
On Mon, 3 Oct 2016, Sean Greenslade wrote:
I personally don't use RBLs as hard blocks. Instead, I have them set up
in my spam filter (SpamAssassin) with different weights. That way, if
one particular RBL is acting up, I can de-weight it and keep an eye on
it without it affecting delivery.
The
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 02:59:08PM -0400, Fongaboo wrote:
>
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2016, Sean Greenslade wrote:
>
> > I personally don't use RBLs as hard blocks. Instead, I have them set up
> > in my spam filter (SpamAssassin) with different weights. That way, if
> > one particular RBL is acting up, I c
On 04/10/16 07:02, Sean Greenslade wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 01:47:28PM -0400, Fongaboo wrote:
> I personally don't use RBLs as hard blocks. Instead, I have them set up
> in my spam filter (SpamAssassin) with different weights. That way, if
> one particular RBL is acting up, I can de-weight
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 05:37:33PM +1300, Peter wrote:
> The main problem with this is that one of the primary advantages to
> using a DNSRBL is that it sits in front of SpamAssassin. DNSRBL
> blockign does not require deep inspection of message content so it can
> be checked first and clients blo
> On 04/10/16 07:02, Sean Greenslade wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 01:47:28PM -0400, Fongaboo wrote:
>> I personally don't use RBLs as hard blocks. Instead, I have them set up
>> in my spam filter (SpamAssassin) with different weights. That way, if
>> one particular RBL is acting up, I can de-
This thread probably needs to wind down; once again I will suggest
taking discussions of this nature to a list I co-manage:
http://spammers.dontlike.us/
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 01:13:00AM -0400, Sean Greenslade wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 05:37:33PM +1300, Peter wrote:
> > The main probl
10 matches
Mail list logo