Re: Problems with IPv6

On 10/09/16 09:29, Dirk Stöcker wrote: >> The >> tools which work so well in IPv4, namely DNSBL services, won't cope >> with IPv6. > > That's probably untrue. To cope with address randomization you simply > can block the whole "/64". That saves much space. Depending on provider > policy maybe

Re: Problems with IPv6

On Thu, 8 Sep 2016, /dev/rob0 wrote: I am not in any hurry to move my email into IPv6 land. For now I am satisfied to have IPv4-only MX records for my domains. My server is IPv4-only, for that matter. I'm operating dual stacked servers for years now and don't see negative impact. Majority

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

On 09/09/16 19:57, Benny Pedersen wrote: > On 2016-09-09 18:37, Allen Coates wrote: > >> Also, the Spamhaus DROP listings now have a file of compromised IPv6 >> netblocks. (I have a multi-list / IPv6 version of Julien Vehent's >> lasso-update.sh - which processes the listings for postscreen

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

On 2016-09-09 18:37, Allen Coates wrote: Also, the Spamhaus DROP listings now have a file of compromised IPv6 netblocks. (I have a multi-list / IPv6 version of Julien Vehent's lasso-update.sh - which processes the listings for postscreen - if anyone is interested) yes i would like to

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

On 09/09/16 15:08, Blake Hudson wrote: > Couldn't one just use a separate smtpd listener in master.cf for IP4 > and IP6 if one wanted to implement different policies for each protocol? > > Personally, I want to have parity between IP4 and IP6, not additional > differences that are going to

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

On 9/9/2016 6:47 AM, Allen Coates wrote: > > I was thinking along the lines of using > reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname > > for IPv4, and the stronger reject_unknown_client_hostname >

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

Allen Coates wrote on 9/9/2016 6:47 AM: On 09/09/16 11:47, Wietse Venema wrote: Is there a way of segregating IPv4 and IPv6 tests in postfix? Not at this time. What would a segregated user interface look like in smtpd? In postscreen? Wietse I was thinking along the lines of using

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

And I didn't say "Thank You" for your comments. Allen

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

On 09/09/16 11:47, Wietse Venema wrote: > > Is there a way of segregating IPv4 and IPv6 tests in postfix? > Not at this time. What would a segregated user interface look like > in smtpd? In postscreen? > > Wietse > I was thinking along the lines of using

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

Allen Coates: > It seems rather pointless to offer an IPv6 address to an IPv4 RBL - and > vice versa. spamhaus supports the same queries as for IPv4, as described in the first stage of their two-stage IPv6 Blocklists Strategy. I expect that some other DNSBLs will do similar things. > Is there

Re: Problems with IPv6 - spin-off question

It seems rather pointless to offer an IPv6 address to an IPv4 RBL - and vice versa. Is there a way of segregating IPv4 and IPv6 tests in postfix? Allen C

Re: Problems with IPv6

On 08/09/2016 9:45 pm, Allen Coates wrote: > I would be interested to know the measures other people use. Maybe I've just been lucky with spam, but I just use greylisting, my thought being that most spam will be sent from scripts rather than a well configured mail server, and these scripts won't

Re: Problems with IPv6

I have thought long and hard about IPv6 spam. Fortunately I have only had a couple of messages - so far... Within postscreen, I have whitelisted all my regular ipv6 correspondents, and am using bl.ipv6.spameatingmonkey.net, and the cymru.com bogon lists in the rbls Within smtpd, I use all the

Re: Problems with IPv6

On 08.09.16 16:24, /dev/rob0 wrote: > I am not in any hurry to move my email into IPv6 land. For now I am > satisfied to have IPv4-only MX records for my domains. My server is > IPv4-only, for that matter. I hope you, and other people, will reconsider. It believe that the more people adopt IPv6,

Re: Problems with IPv6

/dev/rob0 wrote on 9/8/2016 9:24 AM: On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 02:18:41PM +0100, Danny Horne wrote: Thanks for the reply, I found the following site which showed me I was seriously lacking in my IPv6 config. I think I've got it fixed now (email from GMail came through on an IPv6 address)

Re: Problems with IPv6

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 02:18:41PM +0100, Danny Horne wrote: > Thanks for the reply, I found the following site which showed me I > was seriously lacking in my IPv6 config. I think I've got it fixed > now (email from GMail came through on an IPv6 address) > >

Re: Problems with IPv6

Thanks for the reply, I found the following site which showed me I was seriously lacking in my IPv6 config. I think I've got it fixed now (email from GMail came through on an IPv6 address) http://www.postfix.org/IPV6_README.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Problems with IPv6

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:05:43PM +0100, Danny Horne wrote: > It's just been made aware to me that my Postfix (version 3.1.2) is > having problems with IPv6. Here's the sort of thing I see in the > logs, note it gives no indication it's an IPv6 problem > > Sep 7 16:12:59 turin

Problems with IPv6

Hi all, It's just been made aware to me that my Postfix (version 3.1.2) is having problems with IPv6. Here's the sort of thing I see in the logs, note it gives no indication it's an IPv6 problem Sep 7 16:12:59 turing postfix/smtpd[12487]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from mail-lf0-x22c.google.com