> > For this, SA 3.2.* has its own rules for DNSWL, which you throw away
> > with your custom rule, since they are identically named. The built-in
> > rule for SA 3.2.* is:
> >
> > header RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW eval:check_rbl_sub('dnswl-firsttrusted',
> > '127.0.\d+.1')
> > describe RCVD_IN_DNSW
On 18.10.07 17:32, Lars Ippich wrote:
> >> Now I added IPs to trusted_networks and that causes another problem: The
> >> trusted_network IPs are in the DNSWL and therefore get a positive bonus
> >> from SA.
I guess that's the meaning of trusted_networks setting (or at least one of
its meanings)
>
Alex,
> For this, SA 3.2.* has its own rules for DNSWL, which you throw away
> with your custom rule, since they are identically named. The built-in
> rule for SA 3.2.* is:
>
> header RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW eval:check_rbl_sub('dnswl-firsttrusted',
> '127.0.\d+.1')
> describe RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
Lars Ippich schrieb am 18.10.2007 09:32:
header RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOWX-DNS-Whitelist =~ /^low/
scoreRCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW-1
describe RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOWSender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust
[...]
# web.de
trusted_networks217.72.192.
2) Postfix adds the X-DNS-Whit
Matthias,
>> Now I added IPs to trusted_networks and that causes another problem: The
>> trusted_network IPs are in the DNSWL and therefore get a positive bonus
>> from SA.
>
> Hm, somehow I can't follow what you're trying to do. Can you post the
> relevant parts of your configuration?
Sure:
>
> Now I added IPs to trusted_networks and that causes another problem: The
> trusted_network IPs are in the DNSWL and therefore get a positive bonus
> from SA.
Hm, somehow I can't follow what you're trying to do. Can you post the
relevant parts of your configuration?
> I did not find a solution
Hi list,
I run into the same problem the administrator in the thread
"RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW" has: Having mails being forwarded and having the SA
rules applied to the wrong mail server causing imprecise filter results.
Now I added IPs to trusted_networks and that causes another problem: The
trusted_ne
