Am 13.06.2016 um 20:49 schrieb David B Funk:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2016, Reindl Harald wrote:

* the syntax seems to be correct
* domain listet and dig answers correctly on the sa-machine
* spamassassin -D < sample.eml 2> out.txt
* grep for the uribl don't show any call

uridnsbl   URIBL_LOCAL  uribl.thelounge.net.  A
body       URIBL_LOCAL  eval:check_uridnsbl('URIBL_LOCAL')
describe   URIBL_LOCAL  Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist
score      URIBL_LOCAL  0.1
tflags     URIBL_LOCAL  net domains_only
____________________________________________

with that two variants errors appear in the maillog while i don't get
what's wrong with tell the return-code here - anyways, that confirms
that the rule above seems not to be wrong

Jun 13 00:19:17 mail-gw spamd[5953]: config: SpamAssassin failed to
parse line, "URIBL_LOCAL uribl.thelounge.net. A 127.0.0.2" is not
valid for "uridnsbl", skipping: uridnsbl URIBL_LOCAL
uribl.thelounge.net. A 127.0.0.2

Jun 13 00:20:03 mail-gw spamd[5953]: config: SpamAssassin failed to
parse line, "URIBL_LOCAL uribl.thelounge.net." is not valid for
"uridnsbl", skipping: uridnsbl URIBL_LOCAL uribl.thelounge.net.

Did you "--lint" check the rules before you tried testing them?

yes, as said the syntax seems to be correct

also according to https://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_URIDNSBL.html

tried also with TXT, no difference, while i would prefer A since it's shorter in responses and in doubt with a defined response code, but that's a nice-to-have

That 'SpamAssassin failed to parse line' error sounds like you've got a
syntax error in there

please read again: "failed to parse line" shows different tries as the rule above (which is listed in the error message) but besides that lint is fine with the current one it shows that the config seems to be recognized

why "A 127.0.0.2" is wrong instead jsut "A" is a different issue and don't matter as long as i would not have different respnse codes for different rules / scores with a single rbldnsd zone

ignore anything below the line for the real problem

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to