On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 03:31:34 am mouss wrote: > James Gray wrote: > > Why are rules that look up against this list still in the base of > > SpamAssassin?? The SORBS dynamic list is so poorly maintained that > > it's practically useless and if you are an unfortunate who ends up > > incorrectly listed in it, good luck getting off it! Case at hand, the > > company I work for purchased a /19 address block directly from APNIC > > before anyone else had it (IOW, we were the first users of that block). > > > > We now have both our external mail IP's listed in SORBS_DUL despite > > the fact the /24 they belong to, and the /24's on either side have > > NEVER been part of a dynamic pool. SORBS refuse to delist them as our > > MX records are different to these outgoing mail servers! FFS - we run > > managed services for a number of ISP's why the hell would we *want* to > > munge all our inbound and outbound mail through the same IP's?!? > > > > Seriously folks, can we make SORBS_DUL optional and not "on by > > default" in the general distribution? > > If you have a complaint, provide _evidence_. otherwise, it goes to > /dev/troll0. > > while you are at it, fix your DNS. your domain has been succesfully > submitted to rfci (boguxms): > http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/tools/lookup.php?domain=gray.net.au
I forgot to mention: thanks for getting me listed on rfci too:
$ dig -x 82.239.111.75
--8<-- snipped --8<--
;; ANSWER SECTION:
75.111.239.82.in-addr.arpa. 85430 IN PTR ouzoud.netoyen.net.
James
--
As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; they kill us for their sport.
-- Shakespeare, "King Lear"
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
