Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 03:31:34 am mouss wrote:
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
On 26.03.08 11:30, James Gray wrote:
Yes - that's one of my personal domains, not the work one. Yes the TTL's are
short because I recently reorganised my DNS server and added some new slaves.
I just haven't got around to changing the TTL's. TTL's are fixed now, along
with the bum-steer regarding the address I got from the guys handling my
secondary MX. Grrr.
In your first mail you accused SORBS lis of being
"poorly maintained that it'spractically useless"
now you are saying that you have kept TTLs at 3600 because you
"haven't got around to changing the TTL's"
Oh dear - confusion really has set into this thread :P The TTL's at
3600 were for my PERSONAL DNS, which ISN'T listed on SORBS (and never
has been). The addresses I have problems with are on a TOTALLY
DIFFERENT SYSTEM at work. People on *this* list made certain
assumptions based on my e-mail address as to which IP's I was referring
to - they were wrong. I have many e-mail addresses and switch and
change between them at will.
The SORBS_DUL seems to arbitrarily gobble up blocks that have never been
part of dynamic ranges, and never been parked either, then they refuse
to de-list them. That is the situation I am faced with currently. See
my most recent message to this list which has all the IP's in question.
I'd say that your DNS is poorly maintained, not the SORBS DUL. The
conditions for listing and requirements for delisting are imho logical and
fair and I would sign under them.
As long as you're not in the process (like we were until about 5 days
ago) migrating a DNS cluster from one co-lo to another which required
short TTL's until the addresses were all migrated - this is pretty
standard practice in my experience. However, the listing on SORBS_DUL
occurred (before my time with this company) back in 2006 and was done
despite the DNS setup being perfectly "normal" with 24hour TTL's by default.
If you think you have fixed all requirementd for delisting from SORBS DUL,
you can re-request delisting, or ask in proper (sorbs) forum to validate
them.
SORBS forum for support requests? Their website says the only way to
have them de-listed is to use their support form and the request must
come from someone responsible for the IP block (which I am):
https://www.us.sorbs.net/faq/supportreq.shtml
So you say forum, SORBS say support page...who's telling the truth?
Frankly I don't care, I would just rather walk away from SORBS; I
haven't missed them since scoring every SORBS rule at zero on our entire
mail cluster. However, knowing how badly our IP ranges have been
handled by SORBS, I wouldn't recommend them to anyone else - hence my
query regarding their inclusion as art of the SpamAssassin default rule set.
Wasn't trying to offend anyone - if you use SORBS and get reasonable
results, great...just hope none of our customers ever need to send your
users e-mail.
Cheers,
James
