mouss is french, you must know ;-)
French mouse?
;-)
http://disney.go.com/disneyvideos/animatedfilms/ratatouille/
No offense intended of course... it really was a cute movie...
Time for vacations!
- rh
something like this:
digitalalias.net http://digitalalias.net 14400 IN MX 0
digitalalias.net http://digitalalias.net
What is 14400, I'm guessing a port of some kind. Besides that the wiki
suggests that my first fake mx record should be set at 10, then my real mx
record at 20, and then another
Robert - elists wrote:
mouss is french, you must know ;-)
French mouse?
mousse means foam. Franciscaner weiss?
;-)
http://disney.go.com/disneyvideos/animatedfilms/ratatouille/
No offense intended of course... it really was a cute movie...
I loved it.
Time for vacations!
On Dienstag, 24. Juni 2008 Benny Pedersen wrote:
14400 is 4 hours (4*3660) which is a bit low for an MX 86400
(24 hours) is probably better.
nice calc for 4 hours :-)
mouss is french, you must know ;-)
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc- http://it-management.at
//
Michael Monnerie wrote:
On Dienstag, 24. Juni 2008 Benny Pedersen wrote:
14400 is 4 hours (4*3660) which is a bit low for an MX 86400
(24 hours) is probably better.
nice calc for 4 hours :-)
mouss is french, you must know ;-)
yep. I have problems with anything but the
What is 14400, I'm guessing a port of some kind. Besides that the wiki
suggests that my first fake mx record should be set at 10, then my real mx
record at 20, and then another fake one at 30. Why is this since my current
mx record is set to 0?
fake0.example.com 10
realmx.example.com 20
fake1
first fake mx record should be set
at 10, then my real mx record at 20, and then another fake one at 30. Why
is this since my current mx record is set to 0?
The numbers is irelevant, only the order is. 0-1-2 will have the same effect
as 10-20-30 or 10-95-100.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [EMAIL
-to-live. It tells the world how often (in seconds) they should
check back to see if this record has changed. You are telling people to
check once every 4 hours.
I'm guessing a port of some kind. Besides that the wiki suggests that
my first fake mx record should be set at 10, then my real mx
Marc Ferguson schrieb am 20.06.2008 16:38:
I saw on the wiki a trick to use fake mx records in order to weed out
spam (http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks). I'm using
Evolution at home and on my laptop and I have the spamassassin plugin so
I'm constantly clicking the junk icon.
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, McDonald, Dan wrote:
But I'm not convinced that twiddling with fake MX records will reduce
your spam level any.
Cue Mr. Perkel... :)
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a [EMAIL
://digitalalias.net 14400 IN MX 0
digitalalias.net http://digitalalias.net
What is 14400, I'm guessing a port of some kind. Besides that the
wiki suggests that my first fake mx record should be set at 10, then
my real mx record at 20, and then another fake one at 30. Why is this
since my
://digitalalias.net 14400 IN MX 0
digitalalias.net http://digitalalias.net
What is 14400, I'm guessing a port of some kind. Besides that the
wiki suggests that my first fake mx record should be set at 10, then
my real mx record at 20, and then another fake one at 30. Why is this
since my
this:
digitalalias.net http://digitalalias.net 14400 IN MX 0
digitalalias.net http://digitalalias.net
What is 14400, I'm guessing a port of some kind. Besides that the
wiki suggests that my first fake mx record should be set at 10, then
my real mx record at 20, and then another fake one at 30. Why
0 digitalalias.net
What is 14400, I'm guessing a port of some kind.
nice try :) it's an (optional) TTL.
http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/
14400 is 4 hours (4*3660) which is a bit low for an MX 86400 (24
hours) is probably better.
Besides that the wiki
suggests that my first fake mx
On Mon, June 23, 2008 21:27, mouss wrote:
14400 is 4 hours (4*3660) which is a bit low for an MX 86400 (24
hours) is probably better.
nice calc for 4 hours :-)
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net/?coupon=cust37098
Am 2008-05-23 11:18:57, schrieb Robin Bowes:
Marc Perkel wrote:
First to do what I'm doing you have to be using EXIM. If you aren't
running exim then you just can't do it. In fact, with all due respect, I
can't see how anyone can do spam filtering and not use exim as their MTA.
qpsmtpd
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 21, 2008, at 1:44 PM, mouss wrote:
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
start by updating the RFCs.
The RFCs are, and have always been clear on how MX records are
supposed to be used.
Different people interpret when a delivery attempt succeeds differently.
Marc Perkel wrote:
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 7, 2008, at 9:17 AM, mouss wrote:
what if he comes back later to the same MX, again and again (AFAIK,
this is the case with qmail)? mail will be lost.
snarky comment
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
/snarky comment
Agreed. Qmail should die!
On May 7, 2008, at 9:17 AM, mouss wrote:
what if he comes back later to the same MX, again and again (AFAIK,
this is the case with qmail)? mail will be lost.
snarky comment
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
/snarky comment
--
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy,
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 7, 2008, at 9:17 AM, mouss wrote:
what if he comes back later to the same MX, again and again (AFAIK,
this is the case with qmail)? mail will be lost.
snarky comment
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
/snarky comment
start by updating the RFCs.
mouss wrote:
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 7, 2008, at 9:17 AM, mouss wrote:
what if he comes back later to the same MX, again and again (AFAIK,
this is the case with qmail)? mail will be lost.
snarky comment
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
/snarky comment
start by updating the RFCs.
Marc Perkel wrote:
mouss wrote:
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 7, 2008, at 9:17 AM, mouss wrote:
what if he comes back later to the same MX, again and again (AFAIK,
this is the case with qmail)? mail will be lost.
snarky comment
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
/snarky comment
start by
On May 21, 2008, at 1:44 PM, mouss wrote:
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
start by updating the RFCs.
The RFCs are, and have always been clear on how MX records are
supposed to be used.
Are you just a nonsense machine? The SA list's personal eliza run
through the borker?
--
Jo
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 7, 2008, at 9:17 AM, mouss wrote:
what if he comes back later to the same MX, again and again (AFAIK,
this is the case with qmail)? mail will be lost.
snarky comment
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
/snarky comment
Agreed. Qmail should die!
numbered fake MX record. Here's how you would configure your domain:
A generous offer and an admirable effort. But if you think I or my
clients are going to route mail to your servers you are mistaken. Even
if I knew you personally, I don't think ethics or common sense would
allow me to do so
IOn Wed, 2008-05-07 at 08:50 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Looking for a few volunteers who want to reduce their spambot spam and
at the same time help me track spambots for my black list. This is free
and mutual benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your highest
numbered fake MX record
benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your highest
numbered fake MX record. Here's how you would configure your domain:
A generous offer and an admirable effort. But if you think I or my
clients are going to route mail to your servers you are mistaken. Even
if I knew you
fake MX record. Here's how you would configure your domain:
mail.yourdomain.com MX 10
tarbaby.junkemailfilter.com MX 20
I will never actually receive your email. The recipient all always get a
451 error just after the DATA command. So if your servers are down you
won't lose anything. A 451 error
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Marc Perkel wrote:
To participate all you have to do is set your highest numbered MX to
point to:
tarbaby.junkemailfilter.com
Several people have asked me how I'm doing this and can they have my
code to do it themselves. My situation is unique enough that it just
won't
John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Marc Perkel wrote:
To participate all you have to do is set your highest numbered MX to
point to:
tarbaby.junkemailfilter.com
Several people have asked me how I'm doing this and can they have my
code to do it themselves. My situation is unique
Well now, if a spambot actually does start recognizing and avoiding his system,
doesn't that mean he wins and the spammer loses?
John Hardin [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/08/08 12:11 PM
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Marc Perkel wrote:
To participate all you have to do is set your highest numbered MX to
Kevin Parris wrote:
Well now, if a spambot actually does start recognizing and avoiding his system,
doesn't that mean he wins and the spammer loses?
I would say YES!
You should make an effort to clean it up so that others *can* install it as a
standalone daemon, as I suggested. Why?
: donderdag 8 mei 2008 19:07
To: Kevin Parris
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Experimental - use my server for your high fake MX record
Kevin Parris wrote:
Well now, if a spambot actually does start recognizing and avoiding his system,
doesn't that mean he wins and the spammer loses
Marc Perkel wrote:
Looking for a few volunteers who want to reduce their spambot spam and
at the same time help me track spambots for my black list. This is
free and mutual benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your
highest numbered fake MX record. Here's how you would configure your
Marc Perkel wrote:
Looking for a few volunteers who want to reduce their spambot spam and
at the same time help me track spambots for my black list. This is free
and mutual benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your highest
numbered fake MX record. Here's how you would configure your
- Original Message -
Marc Perkel wrote:
Looking for a few volunteers who want to reduce their spambot spam and
at the same time help me track spambots for my black list. This is free
and mutual benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your highest
numbered fake MX record. Here's
DAve wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Looking for a few volunteers who want to reduce their spambot spam
and at the same time help me track spambots for my black list. This
is free and mutual benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your
highest numbered fake MX record. Here's how you would
Randy Ramsdell wrote:
DAve wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Looking for a few volunteers who want to reduce their spambot spam
and at the same time help me track spambots for my black list. This
is free and mutual benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your
highest numbered fake MX record
Randy Ramsdell wrote:
DAve wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Looking for a few volunteers who want to reduce their spambot spam
and at the same time help me track spambots for my black list. This
is free and mutual benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your
highest numbered fake MX record
numbered fake MX record. Here's how you would configure
your domain:
A generous offer and an admirable effort. But if you think I or my
clients are going to route mail to your servers you are mistaken.
Even if I knew you personally, I don't think ethics or common sense
would allow me to do so
and mutual benefit. I (junkemailfilter.com) want to be your highest
numbered fake MX record. Here's how you would configure your domain:
A generous offer and an admirable effort. But if you think I or my
clients are going to route mail to your servers you are mistaken. Even if
I
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
If you just want IPs, maybe instead of running an SMTP service that
450s, you would want to use a packet filter like iptables instead. You
could get the IPs simply by what packets you saw come in to port 25 and
noone would have to worry you were
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 5:44 PM, John Hardin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
If you just want IPs, maybe instead of running an SMTP service that 450s,
you would want to use a packet filter like iptables instead. You could get
the IPs simply by what packets
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 5:44 PM, John Hardin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(1) Mark is trying to collect data on how the remote MTA behaves when
presented with a 451 tmpfail result. A firewall rule can't do that.
From his message: I'm not interested in the
John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 5:44 PM, John Hardin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(1) Mark is trying to collect data on how the remote MTA behaves when
presented with a 451 tmpfail result. A firewall rule can't do that.
From his message: I'm not
On http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks (Fake MX Record) ,
where do I insert these values:
fake0.domain.com 10
realmx.domain.com 20
fake1.domain.com 30
TIA.
At 08:17 PM 7/22/2007, Bubuk Gabrok wrote:
On http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks (Fake MX Record) ,
where do I insert these values:
fake0.domain.com 10
realmx.domain.com 20
fake1.domain.com 30
TIA.
In your Zonefile for your DNS.
Evan
On 7/23/07, Evan Platt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 08:17 PM 7/22/2007, Bubuk Gabrok wrote:
On http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks (Fake MX Record) ,
where do I insert these values:
fake0.domain.com 10
realmx.domain.com 20
fake1.domain.com 30
TIA.
In your Zonefile for your DNS
At 20:17 22-07-2007, Bubuk Gabrok wrote:
On http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks (Fake MX Record) ,
where do I insert these values:
Set your DNS records accordingly.
The statement that No good email is lost is subjective.
Regards,
-sm
49 matches
Mail list logo
