Re: [xmail] Is anyone having problems with spamhaus?

2008-11-27 Thread Francesco Vertova

At 14.12 27/11/08, you wrote:


Seems ok here too


It is definitely a problem with the university dns. Changed my dns 
setup and spamhaus worked again.


Ciao, Francesco

___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


Re: [xmail] glst 0.27 xnet bug ?

2008-11-27 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, CLEMENT Francis wrote:

> >-Message d'origine-
> >De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de CLEMENT Francis
> >Envoyé : jeudi 27 novembre 2008 09:58
> >À : 'xmail@xmailserver.org'
> >Objet : [xmail] glst 0.27 xnet bug ?
> >
> >
> >Hello Davide
> >
> >I upgraded recently to glst 0.27 due to mnet problem  (recent 
> >discussion on
> >this list)
> >
> >Now, trying to send a mail from the server itself I got a 
> >rejection 'try
> >later' from glst even if the 'sender ip' is excluded with an 
> >xnet setting :
> >
> >Actual glst.conf xnet and mnet :
> >mnet=0.0.0.0,0.0.0.0,255.255.255.0
> >
> >xnet=172.16.254.0,255.255.255.255
> >
> >For a mail send from server itself from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to 
> >"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" I get
> >:
> >
> >Smtp log :
> >"myhost" "myhost""172.16.254.0"  "2008-11-27 09:10:10"
> >"myhost" "to.com""[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 
> >"S4DB2A9"
> >"RCPT=OK"""  "0" ""
> >"myhost" "myhost""172.16.254.0"  "2008-11-27 09:10:10"
> >"myhost" "to.com""[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 
> >"S4DB2A9"
> >"DATA=EFILTER"   ""  "0" ""
> >
> >Sender IP confirmed = 172.16.254.0
> >
> >Filters log :
> >"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"  "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "172.16.254.0"  
> >"172.16.254.0"   "2008-11-27
> >09:10:10""pre-data"  ""  "0" "3"
> >"\glst\glst;--mfile;C:\DOCUME~1\_XMAIL~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\msrv6980
> >45e.tmp;"
> >
> >In fact Glst returneds 'retry later' 
> >
> >I did not have this problem with glst 0.25 (never seens 0.26) with
> >mnet=0.0.0.0,0.0.0.0,255.255.255.255 (due to mnet problem) and 
> >same xnet
> >settings when sending from same ip 172.16.254.0
> >(I can't try now to return to these old setting to see if 'ok' on 0.27)
> >
> >Any idea ?
> >
> >Francis
> >
> >
> 
> After some inspection in the glst base, I found numerous 'masked' entries
> corresponding to all my 'xnet'
> So seems xnet settings are not taken into account BEFORE any database access
> or mnet 'rule' !?!?
> (I cleared the glst database when changed from glst 0.25 to 0.27 and mnet
> changes, so it not 'old' entries. Even if old, they should not be read
> before all xnet entries applied, no ?)

"mnet" masking is applied *before* "xnet" whitelisting. It makes even 
sense. If for you a given address set is "the same" (this is what mnet" 
does), it makes no sense having different policies inside that set.



- Davide

___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


Re: [xmail] Return-Path missing in delivery error notifications

2008-11-27 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Oliver Stöneberg wrote:

> Quoting RFC 2821 section 6.1:
> 
> If there is a delivery failure after acceptance of a message, the
>receiver-SMTP MUST formulate and mail a notification message.  
> This
>notification MUST be sent using a null ("<>") reverse path in the
>envelope.  The recipient of this notification MUST be the address
>from the envelope return path (or the Return-Path: line).  
> However,
>if this address is null ("<>"), the receiver-SMTP MUST NOT send a
>notification.  Obviously, nothing in this section can or should
>prohibit local decisions (i.e., as part of the same system
>environment as the receiver-SMTP) to log or otherwise transmit
>information about null address events locally if that is desired.  
> If
>the address is an explicit source route, it MUST be stripped down 
> to
>its final hop.
> 
> XMail doesn't set the "Return-Path" header at all, so the non-
> delivery reports are not following the RFC.

The Return-Path header must be set only when SMTP servers do the "final 
delivery" on the recipient mailbox.
An MTA->MTA message must not set Return-Path. XMail inserts the 
Return-Path only when dropping messages inside its own mailboxes (final 
deliveries).

"When the delivery SMTP server makes the "final delivery" of a
 message, it inserts a return-path line at the beginning of the mail
 data.  This use of return-path is required; mail systems MUST support
 it.  The return-path line preserves the information in the  from the MAIL command.  Here, final delivery means the message
 has left the SMTP environment.  Normally, this would mean it had been
 delivered to the destination user or an associated mail drop, but in
 some cases it may be further processed and transmitted by another
 mail system."

Note that there are historical issues about the Return-Path, and note the 
phrase "message has left the SMTP environment". In todays infrastrucutre, 
the SMTP "environment" is left only when a message is finally delivered.




- Davide

___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


Re: [xmail] typo in Errors.cpp

2008-11-27 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Oliver Stöneberg wrote:

> I wanted to mention this in my last mail, but forgot. The error 
> string for ERR_CFG_VAR_NOT_FOUND has a small typo. It should say 
> "variable" instead.

Thanks! A little bit of Italian sneaked out of my keyboard :D



- Davide

___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


Re: [xmail] Is anyone having problems with spamhaus?

2008-11-27 Thread Francesco Vertova

At 14.12 27/11/08, you wrote:


Seems ok here too
Perhabs your xmail server (or SmartDnsHost if configured) try only the
'temporary unavailable' spamhaus dns server (as seens in the report)


What does your nslookup report for zen.spamhaus.org? Mine reports a 
timeout error, maybe it is related.


Ciao, Francesco

___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


Re: [xmail] Is anyone having problems with spamhaus?

2008-11-27 Thread CLEMENT Francis
>-Message d'origine-
>De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de Filip Supera
>Envoyé : jeudi 27 novembre 2008 13:24
>À : XMail Users Mailing List
>Objet : Re: [xmail] Is anyone having problems with spamhaus?
>
>
>Francesco Vertova :
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> zen.spamhaus.org has been catching nothing on my server for 
>over a week, 
>> now (it used to catch thousands of spams per day). Looks like XMail 
>> cannot reach it, maybe because of some DNS problems of theirs (see 
>> 
>http://www.dnssniffer.com/report.php?>domain=spamhaus.org&Sniff=Sniff). 
>> Is it still working for you?
>> 
>
>Here it does. 527 spams caught today.
>
>
>

Seems ok here too
Perhabs your xmail server (or SmartDnsHost if configured) try only the
'temporary unavailable' spamhaus dns server (as seens in the report)

Francis
___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


Re: [xmail] Is anyone having problems with spamhaus?

2008-11-27 Thread Filip Supera

Francesco Vertova :

Hi all,

zen.spamhaus.org has been catching nothing on my server for over a week, 
now (it used to catch thousands of spams per day). Looks like XMail 
cannot reach it, maybe because of some DNS problems of theirs (see 
http://www.dnssniffer.com/report.php?domain=spamhaus.org&Sniff=Sniff). 
Is it still working for you?




Here it does. 527 spams caught today.



___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


[xmail] Return-Path missing in delivery error notifications

2008-11-27 Thread Oliver Stöneberg
Quoting RFC 2821 section 6.1:

If there is a delivery failure after acceptance of a message, the
   receiver-SMTP MUST formulate and mail a notification message.  
This
   notification MUST be sent using a null ("<>") reverse path in the
   envelope.  The recipient of this notification MUST be the address
   from the envelope return path (or the Return-Path: line).  
However,
   if this address is null ("<>"), the receiver-SMTP MUST NOT send a
   notification.  Obviously, nothing in this section can or should
   prohibit local decisions (i.e., as part of the same system
   environment as the receiver-SMTP) to log or otherwise transmit
   information about null address events locally if that is desired.  
If
   the address is an explicit source route, it MUST be stripped down 
to
   its final hop.

XMail doesn't set the "Return-Path" header at all, so the non-
delivery reports are not following the RFC.
___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


[xmail] typo in Errors.cpp

2008-11-27 Thread Oliver Stöneberg
I wanted to mention this in my last mail, but forgot. The error 
string for ERR_CFG_VAR_NOT_FOUND has a small typo. It should say 
"variable" instead.
___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


[xmail] Is anyone having problems with spamhaus?

2008-11-27 Thread Francesco Vertova

Hi all,

zen.spamhaus.org has been catching nothing on my server for over a 
week, now (it used to catch thousands of spams per day). Looks like 
XMail cannot reach it, maybe because of some DNS problems of theirs 
(see 
http://www.dnssniffer.com/report.php?domain=spamhaus.org&Sniff=Sniff). 
Is it still working for you?


Ciao, Francesco

___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


Re: [xmail] glst 0.27 xnet bug ?

2008-11-27 Thread CLEMENT Francis
>-Message d'origine-
>De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de CLEMENT Francis
>Envoyé : jeudi 27 novembre 2008 09:58
>À : 'xmail@xmailserver.org'
>Objet : [xmail] glst 0.27 xnet bug ?
>
>
>Hello Davide
>
>I upgraded recently to glst 0.27 due to mnet problem  (recent 
>discussion on
>this list)
>
>Now, trying to send a mail from the server itself I got a 
>rejection 'try
>later' from glst even if the 'sender ip' is excluded with an 
>xnet setting :
>
>Actual glst.conf xnet and mnet :
>mnet=0.0.0.0,0.0.0.0,255.255.255.0
>
>xnet=172.16.254.0,255.255.255.255
>
>For a mail send from server itself from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to 
>"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" I get
>:
>
>Smtp log :
>"myhost"   "myhost""172.16.254.0"  "2008-11-27 09:10:10"
>"myhost"   "to.com""[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 
>"S4DB2A9"
>"RCPT=OK"  ""  "0" ""
>"myhost"   "myhost""172.16.254.0"  "2008-11-27 09:10:10"
>"myhost"   "to.com""[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 
>"S4DB2A9"
>"DATA=EFILTER" ""  "0" ""
>
>Sender IP confirmed = 172.16.254.0
>
>Filters log :
>"[EMAIL PROTECTED]""[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "172.16.254.0"  
>"172.16.254.0" "2008-11-27
>09:10:10"  "pre-data"  ""  "0" "3"
>"\glst\glst;--mfile;C:\DOCUME~1\_XMAIL~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\msrv6980
>45e.tmp;"
>
>In fact Glst returneds 'retry later' 
>
>I did not have this problem with glst 0.25 (never seens 0.26) with
>mnet=0.0.0.0,0.0.0.0,255.255.255.255 (due to mnet problem) and 
>same xnet
>settings when sending from same ip 172.16.254.0
>(I can't try now to return to these old setting to see if 'ok' on 0.27)
>
>Any idea ?
>
>Francis
>
>

After some inspection in the glst base, I found numerous 'masked' entries
corresponding to all my 'xnet'
So seems xnet settings are not taken into account BEFORE any database access
or mnet 'rule' !?!?
(I cleared the glst database when changed from glst 0.25 to 0.27 and mnet
changes, so it not 'old' entries. Even if old, they should not be read
before all xnet entries applied, no ?)

Francis

___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail


[xmail] glst 0.27 xnet bug ?

2008-11-27 Thread CLEMENT Francis
Hello Davide

I upgraded recently to glst 0.27 due to mnet problem  (recent discussion on
this list)

Now, trying to send a mail from the server itself I got a rejection 'try
later' from glst even if the 'sender ip' is excluded with an xnet setting :

Actual glst.conf xnet and mnet :
mnet=0.0.0.0,0.0.0.0,255.255.255.0

xnet=172.16.254.0,255.255.255.255

For a mail send from server itself from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to "[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]" I get
:

Smtp log :
"myhost""myhost""172.16.254.0"  "2008-11-27 09:10:10"
"myhost""to.com""[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 
"S4DB2A9"
"RCPT=OK"   ""  "0" ""
"myhost""myhost""172.16.254.0"  "2008-11-27 09:10:10"
"myhost""to.com""[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 
"S4DB2A9"
"DATA=EFILTER"  ""  "0" ""

Sender IP confirmed = 172.16.254.0

Filters log :
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" "172.16.254.0"  "172.16.254.0"  
"2008-11-27
09:10:10"   "pre-data"  ""  "0" "3"
"\glst\glst;--mfile;C:\DOCUME~1\_XMAIL~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\msrv698045e.tmp;"

In fact Glst returneds 'retry later' 

I did not have this problem with glst 0.25 (never seens 0.26) with
mnet=0.0.0.0,0.0.0.0,255.255.255.255 (due to mnet problem) and same xnet
settings when sending from same ip 172.16.254.0
(I can't try now to return to these old setting to see if 'ok' on 0.27)

Any idea ?

Francis


___
xmail mailing list
xmail@xmailserver.org
http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail