> Yes, it is a comment, yes it should have a closing quotation mark.
> No, you haven't read the documentation of tcprules, have you?
Well.... Nope tcpserver is typically so easy I haven't gone back to read the
documentation. Guess it is about time I do since things are getting a bit
tricky now.
> No, the above wouldn't. Please read this sentence again, and this time
> completely:
> "If you want to be a little more aggressive about it, use the 5th line
> instead of the fourth." (in your example third instead of second).
> Quite easy: comment the second line out and remove the comment mark on
> the third line. Rather easy, even for a "copy/paste guy"
Couldn't tell from your document whether it was a comment or not. The # sign
isn't globally used by all applications. For instance try using it with
Bind. Not a pretty sight. Maybe replacing "use the 5th line instead of the
fourth" with "use the 5th line instead of the fourth by uncommenting it"
would help give the viewer the impression that that # is actually a comment.
> (which
> shouldn't administer a mail system at all if he don't want to read
> documentation, but assumes all configuration is "ready to be copied").
An attempt at humor? :-)
> But PLEASE ... read the comments that describe lines 1-4 on the web
> site again and again, until you understood them. Line two might
> prevent you from blocking this lists server ...
> I guess you should block anything automatically, unless you finally
> understood what you're doing. You might annoy you and innocent third
> parties if you don't know what your finger actions results in ...
Yes I fully understand the ramifications. 209.218.8.2:allow will allow the
Inter7 lists to come through else they won't, =:allow opens the gate wide,
then :allow,RBLSMTPD="-Blocked - comment" locks out anybody that doesn't
have a reverse dns entry with a permanent error.
We are not worried about servers without a reverse lookup. I saw the post
about breaking ones email server on purpose {ridiculous}. Actually the one
without the reverse name lookup would be the broken one in my opinion. Not
that Ken has a broken server I am sure he has a good reason just not sure
what that reason is. Perhaps he left it that way so we can test the reverse
name lookup modification, yah thats it!
Wil Hatfield
