Re: whitelisting X DSL (dynamic IP)s

Hi, Thanks for the tip on using submission, SSL or TLS ports. That solves many of my problems. But I still think that dynmically allocated IPs should be treated somehow differently by SPAMD greylisting process. My point is that if a remote SMTP server goes through the greylisting process and

Re: : whitelisting X DSL (dynamic IP)s

On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 08:25:40AM -0300, Jose Fragoso wrote: Hi, Thanks for the tip on using submission, SSL or TLS ports. That solves many of my problems. But I still think that dynmically allocated IPs should be treated somehow differently by SPAMD greylisting process. My point is

whitelisting X DSL (dynamic IP)s

Hi, I am planning to setup a network with a OpenBSD/SPAMD firewall, and an internal POSTFIX server with SASL SMTP AUTH. While think about it, I realized that I have a problem here. Whenever a mobile user wants to send mail (relaying) through the POSTFIX server, he will have to go through the

Re: whitelisting X DSL (dynamic IP)s

On Oct 16, 2008, at 1:59 PM, Jose Fragoso wrote: So my question is: what is the best way to deal with this kind of situation. Should I reduce the value of whiteexp ? Has anybody thought of way of cleaning such road-warrior addresses on a daily basis ? To be fare, these address should not stay

Re: whitelisting X DSL (dynamic IP)s

Jose Fragoso wrote: Hi, I am planning to setup a network with a OpenBSD/SPAMD firewall, and an internal POSTFIX server with SASL SMTP AUTH. While think about it, I realized that I have a problem here. Whenever a mobile user wants to send mail (relaying) through the POSTFIX server, he will have