Thanks Bill ...
So in essence although I now have a fixed IP
>From a netblock assigned to Fixed IP's
********** RIPE WHOIS OUTPUT *************
% Information related to '195.8.87.0 - 195.8.87.255'
inetnum: 195.8.87.0 - 195.8.87.255
netname: CLARANET-ARMADILLO-STATICS
remarks: <INFRA-AW>
descr: Static IP Addresses assigned to armadillo hosts
descr: London
country: GB
admin-c: NL23-RIPE
tech-c: CH309-RIPE
rev-srv: ns0.clara.net
rev-srv: ns1.clara.net
status: ASSIGNED PA
mnt-by: AS8426-MNT
source: RIPE # Filtered
*************** End WHOIS ****************
I have the correct PTR Record
I have had my ISP make a request to SORBS to de-list the netblock
But because these addresses used to assigned to modems 5 years ago I am
penalised AAARRGGHHHHHH !
Are ISP's not allowed to re-assign addresses?
With the decline of modem use and increased business use of always on ADSL
services what are ISP's expected to do with all those address blocks?
Throw them in the bin?
Well that is my Rant over with
Thanks for listening
No need to reply I know the exim users list can't fix it for me (I'll get
back in my cave now)
Regards
Hill Ruyter
----- Original Message -----
From: "W B Hacker" <wbh@???>
To: "exim users" <exim-users@???>
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: [exim] SORBS
> Hill Ruyter wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Well This is a little unorthodox I know but I am not sure if Bill will
>> get
>> my mail sent directly
>
> Not until you fix the dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net dynamic-IP hit..
>
>> so, sorry list please ignore if you are not Bill Hacker ;o)
>>
>> Bill
>> I sent a mail to the list of addresses your previously provided me
>> and I know your systems are quite strict
>
> Well - yazzz ... that system is playing 'hardball', as it is for R&D ...
> not
> production...
>
>> I think i have fixed my SORBS issue now but just in case would you let me
>> know anything interesting from your logs
>>
>
> I've sent you a log extract off list.
>
> This was not much of a test, as the fault was a dynamic-IP hit.
>
> Both that box and 'production' servers sort that during acl_smtp_rcpt
> phase, so
> per-recipient is no challenge at that stage. You should have seen a
> connect-time
> DSN message that told you why the message was rejected.
>
> The R&D box is postponing that for now, but still smelled a rat, and
> dropped you
> into single-recipient mode in anticipation of the need for separate
> accept/reject responses in acl_smtp_data from scanner scores.
>
> Your logs should show each of:
>
> - an acceptance on postmaster
>
> - one more acceptance
>
> - one rejection
>
> - the second rejection
>
> Spaced out over 72 minutes.
>
> HTH,
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> --
> ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
> ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
> ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
>
