tersson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Steven Dickenson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Giampaolo Tomassoni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: R: R: R: Relay Checker Plugin (code review please?)
Nix wrote:
On 1 Nov 2006, Andreas P
Nix wrote:
On 1 Nov 2006, Andreas Pettersson stated:
Steven Dickenson wrote:
I can't agree with this. Many small businesses in the US get just these kind
of static connections from broadband ISPs.
Comcast, for example, has all of their static customers using rDNS that would
fail your tes
On 1 Nov 2006, Andreas Pettersson stated:
> Steven Dickenson wrote:
>> I can't agree with this. Many small businesses in the US get just these
>> kind of static connections from broadband ISPs.
>> Comcast, for example, has all of their static customers using rDNS that
>> would fail your test
Steven Dickenson wrote:
On Oct 31, 2006, at 6:09 AM, John Rudd wrote:
I've considered the exact opposite (adding static to the check for
keywords). My rules are really looking more for "is this a _client_
host", not "is this a dynamic host". That one check looks for
"dynamic", but I'm n
Steven Dickenson wrote:
On Oct 31, 2006, at 6:09 AM, John Rudd wrote:
I've considered the exact opposite (adding static to the check for
keywords). My rules are really looking more for "is this a _client_
host", not "is this a dynamic host". That one check looks for
"dynamic", but I'm not i
On Oct 31, 2006, at 6:09 AM, John Rudd wrote:
I've considered the exact opposite (adding static to the check for
keywords). My rules are really looking more for "is this a
_client_ host", not "is this a dynamic host". That one check looks
for "dynamic", but I'm not interested in exempting
John Rudd wrote:
> I've considered the exact opposite (adding static to the check for
> keywords). [...] They've still got a hostname that looks like an
> end-client, and an end-client shouldn't be connecting to other
> people's mail servers. Any end-client that connects to someone
> else's email
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
On 31.10.2006 09:32, * Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
Same here in Switzerland, at least one of the main national ISPs calls
his clients nn-nn-nn-nn.static.cablecom.ch
But we had already rejections and spam-tags from many places
even before
that plugin came out. But th
