Hello,
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001, 23:43:49 GMT
Systems, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is there a difference in the way blacklisting is handled with the static
>black list vs. the RBL blacklisting?
No, there's not.
>I have a customers domain whiteholed due to the fact that a great deal of
>their traffic is from a vendor on UUNet who seem to have trouble keeping
>their relays closed. In testing this, I've been able to relay through
>them at some points (they seem to open and close).
>
>The problematic UUNet relays:
>chi6-1.relay.mail.uu.net
>sjc3-1.relay.mail.uu.net
>mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net
>
>and others.
>
>So here's the deal. I have the customers domain routed thusly:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <- Me
><abuse%eims.ca@blacklisted>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <- Me
><*%eims.ca@blacklisted>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <-them
><*@eims.ca>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <-them
>
>So I'd expect everything to go through to them.
>To test I blacklisted the IP's of one of my offsite mail accounts, and
>sent email to myself at [EMAIL PROTECTED], and to a non-whiteholed local
>account.
>The logs show that the IP is in the blacklist but it is delived as
>expected, for the whiteholed account abuse account, and the mail to the
>other non-whiteholed account was undelivered. All as expected.
>
>However the customers mail is not.
>The customer alerted me to unreceived mail from the UUnet based company,
>and I confirm from my logs:
>11:31:20 1 SMTP-358(chi6-1.relay.mail.uu.net) SPAM? Recipient
>'<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' rejected: relaying to [24.0.95.21] is not allowed
>11:47:23 1 SMTP-376(sjc3-1.relay.mail.uu.net) SPAM? Recipient
>'<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' rejected: relaying to [24.0.95.20] is not allowed
>14:32:11 1 SMTP-423(sjc3-1.relay.mail.uu.net) SPAM? Recipient
>'<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' rejected: relaying to [24.0.95.21] is not allowed
>14:41:01 1 SMTP-426(sjc3-1.relay.mail.uu.net) SPAM? Recipient
>'<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' rejected: relaying to [24.0.95.21] is not allowed
>14:48:58 1 SMTP-427(mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) SPAM? Recipient
>'<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' rejected: relaying to [24.0.95.21] is not allowed
>
>Or is the a Relaying bug in SIMS that I could circumvent by delivering his
>domains mail to a local account and delivering it offsite with
>distribution list on the account (not preferrable)
This looks like a bug in SIMS - it's kinda overprotective refusing to relay in this
case. The 'full address'-type router records should set the 'safe relay' flag on the
resulting addresses. I'll check that.
Please write me off-list if you want to get a development version with the fix.
Best regards,
Dmitry Akindinov
=======================================================================
When answering to letters sent to you by the tech.support staff, make
sure the original message you have received is included into your reply.
#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
