On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, Mark Hedges wrote:
OMG I am SO DUMB - I had skip_rbl_checks set in my personal
userconf. DUH.
(nod) Thanks for posting the full logs for both messages.
Once the problem is properly defined, the solution is usually
not too hard to find (though occasionally embarrassing
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Mark Hedges wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Charles Gregory wrote:
Did you look at the logs you posted?
NONE of the DNS tests are being launched on msg 26661
Yes, that is the problem. They run with `spamassassin`, but
they do not run from `spamd`.
Do other
OMG I am SO DUMB - I had skip_rbl_checks set in my personal
userconf. DUH.
Thanks everyone for your helpful suggestions - actually it
was working fine from the beginning.
Mark
Analysis 101:
. the rule is correctly loaded, but not run when scanned
but run when I put the message through the command line.
Did you look at the logs you posted?
NONE of the DNS tests are being launched on msg 26661
Also, for that message, there are a suspicious set of entries
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Charles Gregory wrote:
Did you look at the logs you posted?
NONE of the DNS tests are being launched on msg 26661
Yes, that is the problem. They run with `spamassassin`, but
they do not run from `spamd`.
Do other people see this running `spamd --debug`,
although it
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Mark Hedges wrote:
Hi. I've set up my own rbldnsd server. It's responding
to queries correctly, for example, I am trying to block
the server that this message comes from, 64.22.103.163.
I forgot to say, I'm using 3.2.5 on CentOS 5.3 which runs
Perl 5.8.8.
I also
On fre 20 nov 2009 21:07:00 CET, Mark Hedges wrote
Hi. I've set up my own rbldnsd server. It's responding to
queries correctly, for example, I am trying to block the
server that this message comes from, 64.22.103.163.
spamassassin 21 -D metadata -t msg | less
the ip above is not in the
On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 12:29 -0800, Mark Hedges wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Mark Hedges wrote:
Hi. I've set up my own rbldnsd server. It's responding
to queries correctly, for example, I am trying to block
the server that this message comes from, 64.22.103.163.
I forgot to say, I'm
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On fre 20 nov 2009 21:07:00 CET, Mark Hedges wrote
Hi. I've set up my own rbldnsd server. It's responding to
queries correctly, for example, I am trying to block the
server that this message comes from, 64.22.103.163.
spamassassin 21 -D
On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 14:56 -0800, Mark Hedges wrote:
Trying your suggestion, I found something rather odd. The
test is not triggered (or does not run) when received by
sendmail and scanned via ~/procmailrc. But the test DOES
run, and scores correctly, when I run through the command
line
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 14:56 -0800, Mark Hedges wrote:
Trying your suggestion, I found something rather odd. The
test is not triggered (or does not run) when received by
sendmail and scanned via ~/procmailrc. But the test DOES
run, and
Mark Hedges wrote:
As I've already confirmed by including the debugging log
attachment in my first message, the test rule is loaded, it
expects to be looking at spammers.rbl.dmz. (I have a
somewhat complex setup due to multiple scanners with
different preferences and mostly shared options.)
On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 15:20 -0800, Mark Hedges wrote:
As I've already confirmed by including the debugging log
attachment in my first message, the test rule is loaded,
When run under sendmail and procmail as well?
I might have missed something, but saw that you confirmed the test was
loaded
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 15:20 -0800, Mark Hedges wrote:
As I've already confirmed by including the debugging log
attachment in my first message, the test rule is loaded,
When run under sendmail and procmail as well?
The debug log that I sent the
14 matches
Mail list logo
