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 2018/02/10 21:41:52 UTC
[Bug 7547] New: Problems with ISIPP
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7547
Bug ID: 7547
Summary: Problems with ISIPP
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.4.2
Hardware: PC
OS: Windows NT
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Rules
Assignee: dev@spamassassin.apache.org
Reporter: kmcgrail@apache.org
Target Milestone: Undefined
I'm also seeing issues with ISIPP which is in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf. I've
attached the message I sent them as well as their reply. Another issue
I noticed with ISIPP is
Sep 16 12:09:38 localhost named[1284]: host unreachable resolving
'ns1.ns.isipp.com/A/IN': 67.227.190.38#53
Sep 16 12:09:38 localhost named[1284]: host unreachable resolving
'ns2.ns.isipp.com/A/IN': 67.227.190.38#53
My network is up
chris@localhost:~$ time host isipp.com
isipp.com has address 67.227.187.192
isipp.com mail is handled by 5 smtp.secureserver.net.
isipp.com mail is handled by 0 concerto.isipp.com.
isipp.com mail is handled by 10 mailstore1.secureserver.net.
real 0m0.866s
user 0m0.008s
sys 0m0.004s
chris@localhost:~$ time host isipp.com
isipp.com has address 67.227.187.192
isipp.com mail is handled by 0 concerto.isipp.com.
isipp.com mail is handled by 10 mailstore1.secureserver.net.
isipp.com mail is handled by 5 smtp.secureserver.net.
real 0m0.010s
user 0m0.008s
sys 0m0.000s
Problem, or something I shouldn't concern myself about?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7547] Problems with ISIPP
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7547
--- Comment #4 from Chris <cp...@embarqmail.com> ---
I've seen several instances of:
Jan 5 12:50:19 localhost named[1326]: connection refused resolving
'180.190.42.208.iadb.isipp.com/A/IN': 184.173.92.18#53
Jan 11 09:14:10 localhost named[1232]: SERVFAIL unexpected RCODE resolving
'243.196.193.31.iadb.isipp.com/A/IN': 67.227.187.192#53
These occurred on Jan 5;11;12;15;28 but nothing since then
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7547] Problems with ISIPP
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7547
Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |kmcgrail@apache.org
--- Comment #1 from Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> ---
Good question. Perhaps another rate-limit issue or they block dynamic IPs.
I took this off-list by accident but Chris has low volume and uses a Dynamic
IP. I wonder if ISIPP is similar to barracuda in that it should be considered
for removal from the default rules. Anyone have any feedback?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7547] Problems with ISIPP
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7547
--- Comment #2 from Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> ---
> On 11/15/2017 1:17 PM, Anne P. Mitchell Esq. wrote:
>> This thread was only just brought to our attention, and the thread is now several levels deep and a bit old, so if you can help me out with letting me know what the outstanding issues are, I'd really appreciate it.
>>
>> As best as I can tell from reading through the thread online, there are two questions:
>>
>> 1. Something to do with our zones not responding (?) and
> The key concern is likely from an outage. The issue is whether you meet the free for some policy for default inclusion: https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklistsInclusionPolicy
>
> I think you do and it was just a hiccup? Do all the ISIPP rules in SA meet that policy?
I have just reviewed the policy to make sure that there have been no
significant changes since 2004. We met the criteria then and have not changed
anything at all since then in terms of listing criteria, delisting, addition in
the WADB (our version of a blacklist) etc..
We are actually 'free for all' in terms of lookups, zone transfers, etc.. We
never charge for querying - haven't in 13 years, and never will. Nor do we
limit queries (we do request that large org queriers xfer the zones, but we
don't require it).
Anne P. Mitchell,
CEO/President, Institute for Social Internet Public Policy
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7547] Problems with ISIPP
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7547
Bill Cole <sa...@billmail.scconsult.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC| |sa-bugz-20080315@billmail.s
| |cconsult.com
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #5 from Bill Cole <sa...@billmail.scconsult.com> ---
(In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #0)
> I'm also seeing issues with ISIPP which is in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf. I've
> attached the message I sent them as well as their reply. Another issue
> I noticed with ISIPP is
>
> Sep 16 12:09:38 localhost named[1284]: host unreachable resolving
> 'ns1.ns.isipp.com/A/IN': 67.227.190.38#53
> Sep 16 12:09:38 localhost named[1284]: host unreachable resolving
> 'ns2.ns.isipp.com/A/IN': 67.227.190.38#53
This is common when NS glue records for a domain (e.g. those provided by
*.gtld-servers.net for isipp.com) come with a mix of A and AAAA records, and
the host where named is running has an IPv6 interface configured but has no
IPv6 connectivity to the Internet at large. The simple problem is that named
does not know that AAAA records are not usable.
> Problem, or something I shouldn't concern myself about?
Not a serious problem, although it adds a little sludge to the process of doing
some resolutions, somewhat randomly. So if you have an IPv6 interface that
can't actually be used to reach public IPv6 space, you should add '-4' to the
named command line arguments to avoid ever trying to query an IPv6 address. In
the reverse case (which seems unlikely...) you can give it '-6' to only ever
use IPv6.
The 2 errors from January are far-end problems lost likely caused by transient
local issues on the cited nameservers.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7547] Problems with ISIPP
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7547
Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |cpollock@embarqmail.com
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7547] Problems with ISIPP
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7547
--- Comment #3 from Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> ---
Chris: Is this resolved? I wanted to document Anne's response.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.