This shouldn't happen any more - at least, not from SORBS.
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 09:29:19AM -0700, Christopher Brian Jack wrote:
> >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 18 09:25:34 2004
> Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 09:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 01:30:59PM -0700, Chris Linstruth wrote:
> Reversing this should do the trick. SORBS.NET is way too aggressive and
> often out-of-date with marginal support in gettting erroneous entries removed.
> Spamhaus hasn't given me any problems at all. Nor has the mail-abuse.org
>
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 01:39 pm, Christopher Brian Jack wrote:
> Any smarthost is bad becuase any of them can potentially analyze your
> email going through it (they don't even need to do that; they can just
> inspect the headers in the MTA logfile).
Perhaps you're unaware, but there exists monito
Reversing this should do the trick. SORBS.NET is way too aggressive and
often out-of-date with marginal support in gettting erroneous entries removed.
Spamhaus hasn't given me any problems at all. Nor has the mail-abuse.org
RBL.
Using SORBS with Postfix.
Two parts of the configuration need to be
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 10:39:44AM -0700, Christopher Brian Jack wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 May 2004, Jay Oliveri wrote:
>
> > Don't wait for someone to implement what you've suggested (allowing direct
> > SMTP connections from a dynamic IP); there's enough work to do without
> > building these kinds
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 01:16:58PM -0400, Jay Oliveri wrote:
> Don't wait for someone to implement what you've suggested (allowing direct
> SMTP connections from a dynamic IP); there's enough work to do without
> building these kinds of things that just lead to constant maintenance.
>
> There's
On Tue, 18 May 2004, Jay Oliveri wrote:
> Don't wait for someone to implement what you've suggested (allowing direct
> SMTP connections from a dynamic IP); there's enough work to do without
> building these kinds of things that just lead to constant maintenance.
>
> There's nothing preventing you
Don't wait for someone to implement what you've suggested (allowing direct
SMTP connections from a dynamic IP); there's enough work to do without
building these kinds of things that just lead to constant maintenance.
There's nothing preventing you from using another SMTP gateway; it doesn't
hav
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 18 09:25:34 2004
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 09:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details
The original message was received at Tue, 18 May 2004 09:24:32 -0700 (PDT)
from localhost.enugen.net
