Xtra on Spamcop now.

Chris Hodgetts

14 May 2006 14 May '06

6:28 a.m.

May 15 11:12:35 caitlin postfix/smtpd[20038]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from fep03.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.243]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [210.54.141.243] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?210.54.141.243; from= to= proto=ESMTP helo= May 15 11:12:35 caitlin postfix/smtpd[20038]: disconnect from fep03.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.243]

Show replies by date

Joseph Miller

14 May 14 May

6:34 a.m.

May not be related, but we're finding all mail being forwarded from us to xtra is being junked by them. Anyone able to shed some light as to what's going on over there? Chris Hodgetts wrote on 15/05/06 11:28:

...

May 15 11:12:35 caitlin postfix/smtpd[20038]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from fep03.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.243]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [210.54.141.243] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?210.54.141.243; from= to= proto=ESMTP helo= May 15 11:12:35 caitlin postfix/smtpd[20038]: disconnect from fep03.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.243]

-- Thanks, Joseph Miller Application Developer _________________________________________ http://www.digiweb.co.nz Webhosting, Dedicated Servers, E-commerce Phone: (64 3) 351 6713 PLEASE NOTE: The information contained in this email message and any attached files may be confidential and subject to privilege. The views expressed may not necessarily be the official view of Digiweb New Zealand Limited. All technical advice and opinions are offered on a 'no-liability' basis. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, disclosure or copying of this email is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by reply email and delete the original. Thank you.

Alastair Johnson

6:52 a.m.

Chris Hodgetts wrote:

...

May 15 11:12:35 caitlin postfix/smtpd[20038]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from fep03.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.243]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [210.54.141.243] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?210.54.141.243; from= to= proto=ESMTP helo= May 15 11:12:35 caitlin postfix/smtpd[20038]: disconnect from fep03.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.243]

Isn't this precisely why spamcop suggest not to bounce email on the basis of the bl.spamcop.net list, and instead use it to tag/mark/score email? aj.

Simon Lyall

7:07 a.m.

On Mon, 15 May 2006, Alastair Johnson wrote:

...

Isn't this precisely why spamcop suggest not to bounce email on the basis of the bl.spamcop.net list, and instead use it to tag/mark/score email?

Yep. I am continiously amazed by the number of large mail sites that automaticly block all email from IPs with a RBL listing. They don't seem to realize that with thousands of people behind that mail server IP then it *will* get listed by Sorbs or Spamcop (or many other RBLs) sometimes. If it's you home mail server and you agressive block email then fair enough. If it is a work mail server then I would make sure that your management have signed off on the policy and that the potential downsides were explained to them (and you have a paper trail to prove it). -- Simon J. Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.

Jamie Riden

2:26 p.m.

On 15/05/06, Simon Lyall wrote:

...

On Mon, 15 May 2006, Alastair Johnson wrote:

...
Isn't this precisely why spamcop suggest not to bounce email on the basis of the bl.spamcop.net list, and instead use it to tag/mark/score email?

Yep. I am continiously amazed by the number of large mail sites that automaticly block all email from IPs with a RBL listing.

I found SBL+XBL was fine to do that with while spamcop, SORBS*, etc. caused too many falses, so only got used for scoring. If you're even more conservative than I am, you can only use the Spamhaus DROP list. SBL+XBL used to reject a quite frightening ~60% of mail without causing any issues.

...

If it is a work mail server then I would make sure that your management have signed off on the policy and that the potential downsides were explained to them (and you have a paper trail to prove it).

Definitely, and run and check it in test mode for a month (postfix has warn_if_reject, I think you can add X- headers on Exim) before you start rejecting. I'd add - 1. keep an eye on announcements for the RBL. We all remember what happened when a certain list closed down by returning hits for 0/0, don't we? 2. make sure your DNS servers are up to it, and that the system deals with timeouts gracefully, ie. mail doesn't back up if you can't talk to the RBL. 3. if you absolutely, positively need mail from somewhere, whitelist it. cheers, Jamie [*] - depending on which zones you use -- Jamie Riden / jamesr(a)europe.com / jamie.riden(a)computer.org NZ Honeynet project - http://www.nz-honeynet.org/

Dan Langille

7:02 p.m.

On 15 May 2006 at 11:28, Chris Hodgetts wrote:

...

May 15 11:12:35 caitlin postfix/smtpd[20038]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from fep03.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.243]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [210.54.141.243] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?210.54.141.243; from= to= proto=ESMTP helo= May 15 11:12:35 caitlin postfix/smtpd[20038]: disconnect from fep03.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.243]

FWIW, during BSDCan http://www.bsdcan.org/, I had someone ask me a question that contained "xtra.co.nz" and "spam". -- Dan Langille : Software Developer looking for work my resume: http://www.freebsddiary.org/dan_langille.php

6796

Age (days ago)

6797

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

5 comments

6 participants

participants (6)

Alastair Johnson
Chris Hodgetts
Dan Langille
Jamie Riden
Joseph Miller
Simon Lyall