RE: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2009-02-19 Thread Eric C. Broch
-list@qmailtoaster.com Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue I would presume that if you pinged the machine you would get the old address as well. Look at the box you are doing the testing from and make sure it has correct DNS servers. The nslookup may not be using the same DNS as the box. It us

RE: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2009-02-19 Thread Eric C. Broch
gated throughout the internet, and shouldn't telnet and ping use the contents of /etc/resolv.conf to resolve FQDN's? Eric -Original Message- From: Phil Leinhauser [mailto:p...@teqknow.com] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 9:13 AM To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com Subject

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2009-02-19 Thread Phil Leinhauser
19 Feb 2009 12:04:11 -0500 To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com Subject: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue > Dear List, > > > > I just set up a new email system. It has been up and running for about two > months and works very well. I set this system up for a client and moved all > the DNS

[qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2009-02-19 Thread Eric C. Broch
Dear List, I just set up a new email system. It has been up and running for about two months and works very well. I set this system up for a client and moved all the DNS settings from a previous email provider and ISP. I have one issue that doesn't SEEM to be affecting anything but is just plag

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-16 Thread Eric Shubert
Kent Busbee wrote: > See response WithIn; Dan McAllister wrote: >> I'm a little johnny-come-lately on this discussion, but here's my >> 2-cents worth: >> >> First, let's be clear on something -- with the exception of your own >> LAN, you do not control, nor does your server answer for a reverse-DNS

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-16 Thread Kent Busbee
See response WithIn; Dan McAllister wrote: > I'm a little johnny-come-lately on this discussion, but here's my > 2-cents worth: > > First, let's be clear on something -- with the exception of your own > LAN, you do not control, nor does your server answer for a reverse-DNS > lookup. DJBDNS, Bind,

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-16 Thread Dan McAllister
I'm a little johnny-come-lately on this discussion, but here's my 2-cents worth: First, let's be clear on something -- with the exception of your own LAN, you do not control, nor does your server answer for a reverse-DNS lookup. DJBDNS, Bind, or even windoze DNS servers answer for NAME lookup

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-16 Thread Eric Shubert
Kent Busbee wrote: > See response below; Eric Shubert wrote: >> spamdyke is filtering because the sender isn't authorizing itself. >> The simplest (and safest) solution is to have all senders authorize >> themselves. If they're authorized then all spamdyke filters are bypassed, >> and you don't hav

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-16 Thread Kent Busbee
See response below; Eric Shubert wrote: > spamdyke is filtering because the sender isn't authorizing itself. > The simplest (and safest) solution is to have all senders authorize > themselves. If they're authorized then all spamdyke filters are bypassed, > and you don't have to worry about rDNS fo

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-16 Thread Kent Busbee
Thanks for the answers, guys. Sorry for the delay. MAN, have we had some nasty weather down here. Tornadoes, hail, and rain - lots of it. My house is surrounded by a lake - made by the rain. Ok to the issues: Somehow the power outages, and maybe a fat finger or two messed up the date on the s

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-15 Thread PakOgah
are you using spamdyke? have you try add 192.168.1.19 on /etc/hosts? Kent Busbee wrote: I have an email server DNS issue that I need advice on. When our accounting software sends an email I get the following error: 01-01 02:26:24 DENIED_RDNS_MISSING from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] to: [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-15 Thread Jake Vickers
Kent Busbee wrote: I have an email server DNS issue that I need advice on. When our accounting software sends an email I get the following error: Your time is also busted on your email server. This message came in as dated on Jan 1, 2006. ---

Re: [qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-15 Thread Eric Shubert
spamdyke is filtering because the sender isn't authorizing itself. The simplest (and safest) solution is to have all senders authorize themselves. If they're authorized then all spamdyke filters are bypassed, and you don't have to worry about rDNS for your local network (which is otherwise fruitles

[qmailtoaster] DNS issue

2008-05-15 Thread Kent Busbee
I have an email server DNS issue that I need advice on. When our accounting software sends an email I get the following error: 01-01 02:26:24 DENIED_RDNS_MISSING from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] origin_ip: 192.168.1.19 origin_rdns: (unknown) auth: (unknown) 01-01 02:26:24 DENIED_RDNS