http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4242
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-04 01:37 ------- (In reply to comment #6) > The patch directly tests the numeric NS entries against the URIBL. Without > the > patch the numeric NS entries are first attempted to be resolved into A records > and these then looked up in URIBL, but as this A lookup fails, there is no A > to > lookup in URIBL. The patch tests if NS record is numeric and if so bypasses > the > further lookup of A record for the NS entry and tests the NS record directly > against URIBL (after removing trailing dot) Thanks for the sanity check. What you describe sounds correct. > The NS lookup has to occur first as this is the way the URIBL_SBL rule works. > It > checks against the URIBL the IPs of the NS records for URIs in the email, so > a > lookup of NS records for a domain must occur first. Probably it should be a new ticket, but it would be better if uridnsbl (the command used in the URLBL_SBL rule) did not even try to check NS records when the URI hostname input is an IP address. Jeff C. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
