@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: SPF/TXT records
My comments below will be to all in general, not to anyone specific and
no offence intended to anyone...
RE: Advogato:
Who?
RE: Circlied:
Who ?
Ok enough of the sarcasm :)
Is someone here seriously trying to use those sites as a reason
Le samedi 20 juin 2009 à 07:53 +0200, swilting a écrit :
a powerfull user of domankeys and DKIM
that is it ?
another domain fakessh.eu is up for DK DKIM
the full administrator smtp.wanadoo.fr is a spammeur
script consists of a while loop surrounding a telnet session
Le
its simple the spam on open serveur
that provided on big ISP
my exe win32
look the code
look the config file
its all the best simple
Le samedi 20 juin 2009 à 11:59 +0200, swilting a écrit :
Le samedi 20 juin 2009 à 07:53 +0200, swilting a écrit :
a powerfull user of domankeys and DKIM
Swilting, a mail blocker tells me that you are sending something called
mailbomb.tar.bz2 as an attachment, to this mailing list [which,
sensibly, strips it].
--
/*\
**
** Joe Yao j...@tux.org -
On 18.06.09 16:22, Jeffrey Collyer wrote:
M$ has their own take on SPF called Sender ID, which uses a very similar
record -
v=spf2.0 rather than v=spf1
so be sure to read up on them both before publishing records for one or
the other.
It has downfalls so I recommend not even studying
-users-boun...@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Mike Bernhardt
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 12:37 PM
To: 'Matus UHLAR - fantomas'; bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: RE: SPF/TXT records
So is the general recommendation in this group to NOT implement an empty
SPF2.0
, 2009 12:31 AM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: SPF/TXT records
On 18.06.09 16:22, Jeffrey Collyer wrote:
M$ has their own take on SPF called Sender ID, which uses a very similar
record -
v=spf2.0 rather than v=spf1
so be sure to read up on them both before publishing records for one
- fantomas
uh...@fantomas.sk; bind-users@lists.isc.org
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 12:41:50 PM
Subject: RE: SPF/TXT records
Or moreover not to bother with SPF at all as suggested in these
documents?:
Why you shouldn't jump on the SPF bandwagon:
http://www.advogato.org/article/816.html
How spammers get
My comments below will be to all in general, not to anyone specific and
no offence intended to anyone...
RE: Advogato:
Who?
RE: Circlied:
Who ?
Ok enough of the sarcasm :)
Is someone here seriously trying to use those sites as a reason to not
do something, might as well reference us
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 07:24:41AM +1000, Noel Butler wrote:
...
as the ones given). Seriously if you want to show why not, reference a
reputable site with reputable commentators.
...
Circleid has reputable commentators. I'm not saying that they all are,
only that there exist some; I have
a powerfull user of domankeys and DKIM
that is it ?
another domain fakessh.eu is up for DK DKIM
the full administrator smtp.wanadoo.fr is a spammeur
script consists of a while loop surrounding a telnet session
Le vendredi 19 juin 2009 à 22:38 -0400, Joseph S D Yao a écrit :
On Sat, Jun
This is a bit OT, but...
You specify in an SPF (TXT) record your outbound MTAs, the ones that
everybody outside of your organization will see your mail sourced from.
If it goes through a third-party outsourced provider, you put the
provider's MTAs in your record (best via an include:). If your
It is all too easy for mail marked as from one of your domains to be
forwarded out the other mail server, if your internal mail server lets
every server inside forward mail (e.g., error messages) to it. Unless
you personally set up mail on all servers, in which case you are a
bottleneck. I have
, 2009 12:16 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: SPF/TXT records
It is all too easy for mail marked as from one of your domains to be
forwarded out the other mail server, if your internal mail server lets
every server inside forward mail (e.g., error messages) to it. Unless
you personally set
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:22:26PM -0400, Jeff Lightner wrote:
We don't allow all servers to send email at all. They have to
specifically be configured to send and relay to the Exchange server
which itself must be configured to allow them.
The domain, waterinvoice.com is not in general use
priority.
-Original Message-
From: Joseph S D Yao [mailto:j...@tux.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 12:43 PM
To: Jeff Lightner
Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: SPF/TXT records
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:22:26PM -0400, Jeff Lightner wrote:
We don't allow all servers to send email
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 03:06:14PM -0400, Jeff Lightner wrote:
I'm assuming you mean it would be rejected if you didn't have an SPF
record for the company mail server in addition to the record for the
home consultancy?
In my example, you for some reason don't have control over that DNS
Question:
When one sets SPF/TXT record is it for the relay server/IP that sent the
email to the internet or the originating one?
For example we have a server (atuprd01.water.com) that can not be
reached via the internet. Email originating there is relayed through
our MS-Exchange server (if sent
/TXT records
On 17.06.09 10:46, Jeff Lightner wrote:
When one sets SPF/TXT record is it for the relay server/IP that sent
the
email to the internet or the originating one?
maybe even both. If the outgoing mail relay checks for SPF, and you
don't
use SMTP authentication (in which case relays may
19 matches
Mail list logo
