Bob Proulx a écrit :
> The following header line:
>
> Received: from static-96-254-126-11.tampfl.fios.verizon.net [96.254.126.11]
> by
> windows12.uvault.com with SMTP; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:26:40 -0400
>
> Hits the HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR rule. I tested it this way:
>
> $ perl -le 'if ("static-96-254-126-11.tampfl.fios.verizon.net" =~
> /[a-z]\S*\d+[^\d\s]\d+[^\d\s]\d+[^\d\s]\d+[^\d\s][^\.]*\.\S+\.\S+[^\]]+/) {
> print "Yes" } else { print "No" };'
> Yes
>
> But the address doesn't appear to be in a dynamic block. And it
> doesn't look like a dynamic address pattern to me.
>
> Bob
The name of the rule is worng, but the result is ok. Instead of
"dynamic", I suggest: "UMO" for "Unidentifiable Mailing Object". whether
static-ip-.... is static or not doesn't matter. a lot of junk comes from
such hosts, and we can't report/complain to a domain, since the domain
is that of the SP (and getting SPs to block abuse sources have proven
vain).
