I've got a pretty busy mail system (about 600k messages a day) so I sent an rsync request earlier this week but I haven't heard back yet. I also sent subscription requests on the announce and zones mailing lists and haven't heard anything on those. All of these requests came from support@fiber.net.
If anyone can offer some advice it will be greatly appreciated.
Hang in these Adam :) One of the guys is away at a conference, and another is swamped. I'm not trusted with the keys because I will lock myself out of the car with it running :)
I'll see what I can do.
--Chris
Figured it was likely something along those lines. Not a big deal, I guess, I just hate to be adding to the load on the servers when I could be doing it here and saving a little time and bandwidth cost to boot.
Thanks!
Chris Santerre thought no one was listening and belted out:
I've got a pretty busy mail system (about 600k messages a day) so I sent an rsync request earlier this week but I haven't heard back yet. I also sent subscription requests on the announce and zones mailing lists and haven't heard anything on those. All of these requests came from support@fiber.net.
If anyone can offer some advice it will be greatly appreciated.
Hang in these Adam :) One of the guys is away at a conference, and another is swamped. I'm not trusted with the keys because I will lock myself out of the car with it running :)
I'll see what I can do.
--Chris _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Just out of curiosity, at what number of email per day do you recommend rsyncing to local DNS?
John Delisle, CISA Senior Network Analyst, Network and Security Team Information Systems & Technology Management Dept. Ceridian Canada Ltd 600 - 125 Garry St Winnipeg, MB R3C 3P2 204-975-5909
Adam Bayless adam@baylessfamily.org Sent by: discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org 02/09/2005 01:21 PM Please respond to SURBL Discussion list discuss@lists.surbl.org
To SURBL Discussion list discuss@lists.surbl.org cc
Subject Re: [SURBL-Discuss] rsync
Figured it was likely something along those lines. Not a big deal, I guess, I just hate to be adding to the load on the servers when I could be doing it here and saving a little time and bandwidth cost to boot.
Thanks!
Chris Santerre thought no one was listening and belted out:
I've got a pretty busy mail system (about 600k messages a day) so I sent an rsync request earlier this week but I haven't heard back yet. I also sent subscription requests on the announce and zones mailing lists and haven't heard anything on those. All of these requests came from support@fiber.net.
If anyone can offer some advice it will be greatly appreciated.
Hang in these Adam :) One of the guys is away at a conference, and
another
is swamped. I'm not trusted with the keys because I will lock myself out
of
the car with it running :)
I'll see what I can do.
--Chris _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
*********************************************************************************** This communication is intended to be received only by the individual(s) or entity(s) to whom or to which it is addressed, and contains information which is confidential, privileged and subject to copyright. Any unauthorized use, copying, review or disclosure is prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately if you have received this communication in error (by calling collect, if necessary) so that we can arrange for its return at our expense. Thank you in advance for your anticipated assistance and cooperation.
Ce document est destinee aux seuls destinataires designes, personne ou groupe. Cette telecopie contient des renseignements confidentiels et est regie par les lois sur le droit d'auteur. Toute utilisation, copie, revue ou divulgation non autorisee de la presente est formellement interdite. Si vous avez recu cette telecopie et qu'elle ne vous etait pas destinee, veuillez communiquer immediatement avec l'expediteur, a frais vires si necessaire, afin que nous puissions prendre des dispositions a nos frais pour la recuperer. Nous vous remercions a l'avance de votre cooperation diligente. ***********************************************************************************
On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, 11:41:32 AM, John Delisle wrote:
Just out of curiosity, at what number of email per day do you recommend rsyncing to local DNS?
Most RBLs suggest that the point where it becomes most useful to rsync zone files and serve them up locally is about 100k messages per day. That's the model we also follow with SURBLs.
BTW, we strongly recommend that people use rbldnsd over BIND. rbldnsd is much better suited to this application. For more information please see the Mirroring links under:
http://www.surbl.org/links.html
Adam, I'm sure Raymond will get your access to rsync going when he frees up some cycles.
Cheers,
Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
Raymond got it opened up for me last night. Thanks! We are at about 600k messages a day, so I was pretty anxious to get this in house.
-adam
Jeff Chan thought no one was listening and belted out:
On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, 11:41:32 AM, John Delisle wrote:
Just out of curiosity, at what number of email per day do you recommend rsyncing to local DNS?
Most RBLs suggest that the point where it becomes most useful to rsync zone files and serve them up locally is about 100k messages per day. That's the model we also follow with SURBLs.
BTW, we strongly recommend that people use rbldnsd over BIND. rbldnsd is much better suited to this application. For more information please see the Mirroring links under:
http://www.surbl.org/links.html
Adam, I'm sure Raymond will get your access to rsync going when he frees up some cycles.
Cheers,
Jeff C.
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
name-services.com FP???
This domain was found in the header of a hand-typed, personal message from my Registrar, NameCheap.com
NameCheap.com is very whitehat. Of course, it was flagged in my system for review **because** it was found in the header and not the body (which is an unorthodox and unadvised way of using SURBLs... which is why I audit any such catches).
Still, I think this one should be double-checked.
Thanks,
Rob McEwen
FP: 127.0.0.2
Should local-range (localhost) IP addresses ever be listed in SURBL?
Rob McEwen
Rob,
127.0.0.2 is a test point in SURBL.
Darrell
Rob McEwen writes:
FP: 127.0.0.2
Should local-range (localhost) IP addresses ever be listed in SURBL?
Rob McEwen
Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers.
On Friday, February 11, 2005, 11:56:27 AM, darrell_list darrell_list wrote:
Rob,
127.0.0.2 is a test point in SURBL.
Darrell
Rob McEwen writes:
FP: 127.0.0.2
Should local-range (localhost) IP addresses ever be listed in SURBL?
Rob McEwen
It's a standard testpoint in most RBLs, not just SURBLs.
Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, Rob McEwen wrote:
| FP: 127.0.0.2 | | Should local-range (localhost) IP addresses ever be listed in SURBL?
Hi,
Which particular SURBL do you think it's listed in ?
I think you're confusing SURBLs (which list domain names) with the SpamAssassin facility to resolve URLs to IP addresses and look up the regular DNSBLs.
The IP address 127.0.0.2 is listed in many regular DNSBLs, including the Spamhaus SBL, so, if you're using SA3 with the URIDNSBL plugin and factory rulesets then "URIBL_SBL" with trigger.
Note that this has nothing to do with SURBLs,
Of course, if this causes you problems, you can simply whitelist it with:
uridnsbl_skip_domain 127.0.0.2
Hope that helps.
Chris
-- Chris Edwards, Glasgow University Computing Service
On Friday, February 11, 2005, 3:38:04 PM, Chris Edwards wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, Rob McEwen wrote:
| FP: 127.0.0.2 | | Should local-range (localhost) IP addresses ever be listed in SURBL?
Which particular SURBL do you think it's listed in ?
I think you're confusing SURBLs (which list domain names) with the SpamAssassin facility to resolve URLs to IP addresses and look up the regular DNSBLs.
Actually 127.0.0.2 is listed in all SURBLs as a test point, just like most other RBLs:
http://www.surbl.org/faq.html#testpoints
While SURBLs are mostly domain names, they do have a few IP addresses also:
http://www.surbl.org/usage.html
(That said, it would probably be slightly safer if we didn't list IP addresses. However, we're trying to match what hosts appear in spam, whether they have a host name ((qualified) domain name) or host number (IP address).)
The IP address 127.0.0.2 is listed in many regular DNSBLs, including the Spamhaus SBL, so, if you're using SA3 with the URIDNSBL plugin and factory rulesets then "URIBL_SBL" with trigger.
[...]
Of course, if this causes you problems, you can simply whitelist it with:
uridnsbl_skip_domain 127.0.0.2
Indeed that should only be a problem if one used URIs with that address, e.g.:
http://127.0.0.2-MUNGED/ (without the -MUNGED, of course)
which ought to be unlikely to appear in a message body....
Cheers,
Jeff C. -- "If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
-
Adam Bayless -
Chris Edwards -
Chris Santerre -
darrell_list -
Jeff Chan -
John_Delisle＠ceridian.ca -
Rob McEwen