On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 12:21:13PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 04:26:32PM +0000, Andy Smith wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 06:19:21PM +0200, Hans du Plooy wrote: > > > Which RBLs would you recommend, should someone want to use it? > > > > Of the SORBS ones I only use the DUL to reject at SMTP time. Others > > are used by SpamAssassin's scoring (whatever the default settings of > > SA are). > > My colo box recently got caught by this, despite it being a blatently > static range. It took SORBS 3 months to remove the range from the > blacklist. I really don't reccomend it :) I have to agree and recently changed my policies, as it was brought to my attention that SORBS DUL will list IPs whose reverse DNS states they are clearly not dynamic, simply because the TTL of the PTR record is "too low". If they want that to be their policy then fine, but it's way too arbitrary for my liking.. Cheers, Andy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature