[ On Tuesday, January 6, 2004 at 16:36:15 (+0000), David Woodhouse wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: [Exim] Problems caused by localhost entry in Received
>
> On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 16:23 +0100, Christian Vogel wrote:
> > If some software is querying the rbl for 127.0.0.1 then that software
> > is severly broken. Actually having 127.0.0.1 in a RBL now appears to
> > me to be a *very* clever idea, just to make sure that the mailserver
> > using that RBL is configured correctly!
>
> They use 127.0.0.2 for that not 127.0.0.1.
True, most do, but it's also fine to have a 127.0.0.1 record so that you
can do a real test without having to add an alias address to your
loopback interface (If I'm not mistaken some systems still don't support
aliases on lo0).
One counter-example:
1.0.0.127.dun.dnsrbl.net CNAME test.dnsrbl.net.dialup.dun.dnsrbl.net
test.dnsrbl.net.dialup.dun.dnsrbl.net A 127.0.0.3
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP RoboHack <woods@???>
Planix, Inc. <woods@???> Secrets of the Weird <woods@???>
