You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org on 2007/07/30 14:58:05 UTC
[Bug 5460] whitelist_from_rcvd doesn't work on MTAs with PTR lookups disabled
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5460
jm@jmason.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
------- Additional Comments From jm@jmason.org 2007-07-30 05:58 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> This may be a side effect of the code change to no longer using DNS (ever) to
> automatically determine trust.
Yep, it is. it already is documented:
'=item whitelist_from_rcvd addr@lists.sourceforge.net sourceforge.net
...
This string is matched against the reverse DNS lookup used during the handover
from the internet to your internal network's mail exchangers.'
this should be clearer, though. checked into trunk:
: jm 114...; svn commit -m "clarify documentation to note clearly that MXes must
perform DNS name resolution, for whitelist_from_rcvd to work"
lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf.pm
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf.pm
Transmitting file data .
Committed revision 560957.
and b320 as a trivial doc fix:
: jm 85...; svn commit -m "clarify documentation to note clearly that MXes must
perform DNS name resolution, for whitelist_from_rcvd to work"
lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf.pm
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf.pm
Transmitting file data .
Committed revision 560956.
> I have no idea if 3.1 would do a lookup for you in the described case. Debug
> output (along with the sample message used) from both 3.1 and 3.2 demonstrating
> this would be welcomed. Failing a debug comparison, at least a sample message
> might provoke someone to look at it since I don't think any of the devs would
> touch qmail with a 10' pole in order to generate their own sample. At least I
> won't.
hm. that reaction might be a little OTT ;)
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.