I was under the impression that was supposed to actually be reversed. And keep in mind that I haven't seen the headers from the test message.
My impression was that if I have a trusted_network of my secondary mail server, then any email that goes someplace.net > mail2 > mail1 That mail2 won't be BL queried and that someplace.net would be? does SA query all Recieved:s? And even if it does, it shouldn't query mail2 that I told it was trusted? It's not that it's a trust chain, it's just don't worry about checking SORBS for that server. Right? Wrong? Shut up and sit down? Bryan Britt Beltane Web Services -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ICQ: 53037451 Bryan L. Britt 501-327-8558 Beltane Web Services, Conway, AR http://www.beltane.com ~~~~~~~~~~Support Private Communications on the Internet~~~~~~~~~~ ----------------------- Original Message ----------------------- On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 23:25:55 -0600, "Jon Etkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:16:26 -0800, Justin Mason wrote: > > >You're not trusting 24.93.47.40, whatever that is. Since an > >untrusted host could be a spammer forging everything else from > >then on, the trust chain has to stop there. > > Aaaah. See, I knew I was missing something! Thanks for the > explanation - that behaviour makes perfect sense. Perhaps > Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf should point out this critical piece of > information - as it is now, it simply states: > > trusted_networks ip.add.re.ss[/mask] ... (default: none) > What networks or hosts are 'trusted' in your setup. Trusted in this > case means that relay hosts on these networks are considered to not be > potentially operated by spammers, open relays, or open proxies. DNS > blacklist checks will never query for hosts on these networks. > > hence my confusion. > > Thanks again, > Jon.
