On 23/01/20 18:56, RW wrote:
I'm curious as to what's actually going on here. If I use
dig ns fluent.ltd.uk @
some caches give the 2 servers supplied by Nominet, others give the 3
servers from dns[1-3].fluent.ltd.uk (an extra round-trip).
If I look on Google's 8.8.8.8 I get a random result
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:48:58 +
RW wrote:
> These two are supplied by the ltd.uk nameservers, but if you do an NS
> lookup on one of these you get a third server, dns3.fluent.ltd.uk with
> the IP address 195.78.94.20.
I'm curious as to what's actually going on here. If I use
dig ns
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 05:01:20PM +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> RW skrev den 2020-01-23 16:51:
>
> >I opened bug 7242 for that in 2015 - I thought it had been fixed years
> >ago. It looks like it narrowly missed 3.4.2.
>
> i remember it was that it did 2 lockups for the same ips, and it could
RW skrev den 2020-01-23 16:51:
I opened bug 7242 for that in 2015 - I thought it had been fixed years
ago. It looks like it narrowly missed 3.4.2.
i remember it was that it did 2 lockups for the same ips, and it could
not be resolved to one since it was not same data that is tested, there
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 14:31:01 +
Riccardo Alfieri wrote:
> >>* 0.1 URIBL_SBL_A Contains URL's A record listed in the
> >> Spamhaus SBL
> > I'm not seeing this at present.
>
> I guess it's because you are running 3.4.3+. On previous versions it
> would hit because, as stated in
On 23/01/20 14:48, RW wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:06:01 +
Jonathan Gilpin wrote:
Hi,
It seems that SpamAsassin is giving out a false positive on a
Spamhaus SBL lookup:
* 0.1 URIBL_SBL_A Contains URL's A record listed in the
Spamhaus SBL
I'm not seeing this at present.
I
Hello Riccardo,
On Thursday, January 23, 2020, 7:53:18 AM, Riccardo Alfieri wrote:
RA> if you would care to forward me offlist a complete sample that triggers
RA> the FPs I'll be happy to investigate
FWIW, these very messages to the SA list this morning mentioning this domain
triggered for me
Hello Jonathan,
if you would care to forward me offlist a complete sample that triggers
the FPs I'll be happy to investigate
On 23/01/20 14:51, Jonathan Gilpin wrote:
Our local resolver is 195.78.94.4 and this was verified by another
Spamasassin user who has their own resolver on another
Our local resolver is 195.78.94.4 and this was verified by another Spamasassin
user who has their own resolver on another network.
It has been like this for at least 4 days that I know of and yes it is still
happening.
This seems to be the case for all spam-assassin users, that is, I haven’t
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:06:01 +
Jonathan Gilpin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems that SpamAsassin is giving out a false positive on a
> Spamhaus SBL lookup:
>
> * 0.1 URIBL_SBL_A Contains URL's A record listed in the
> Spamhaus SBL
I'm not seeing this at present.
> * blocklist
>
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 13:06, Jonathan Gilpin
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems that SpamAsassin is giving out a false positive on a Spamhaus SBL
> lookup:
>
> * 0.1 URIBL_SBL_A Contains URL's A record listed in the Spamhaus SBL
> * blocklist
> * [URIs: fluent.ltd.uk]
> * 2.1 URIBL_SBL
Hi,
It seems that SpamAsassin is giving out a false positive on a Spamhaus SBL
lookup:
* 0.1 URIBL_SBL_A Contains URL's A record listed in the Spamhaus SBL
* blocklist
* [URIs: fluent.ltd.uk]
* 2.1 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL's NS IP listed in the
12 matches
Mail list logo
