-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 04:18:34PM +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:

Karanbir Singh wrote:

...

Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:

...

Hi Everyone,

I've had a few messages sent to the list bounce. Looks like the centos mail server IP is blacklisted. Here's the error:

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at yahoo.com. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

centos@centos.org: 72.21.40.12 does not like recipient. Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [68.142.225.207] blocked using multihop.dsbl.org; http://dsbl.org/listing?68.142.225.207 Giving up on 72.21.40.12.

Anyone else notice this?

Regards,

Ranbir

could you please follow this up with the BlockList people and find out whats going on please ? if you need anything from this end, feel free to ask.

actually, what i make of this is that your end is blocked, not mail.centos.org

I can confirm that one.

While none of the address are listed in any "major" RBL (multihop.dsbl.org certainly isn't), there are a few listings for both addresses (checking 122 different RBLs, ick). Here is a summary for both addresses:

======================================================================= Address 72.21.40.12 is listed on the following DNSBLs:

bl.redhatgate.com blackhole.compu.net pm0-no-more.compu.net dnsbl.regedit64.net dnsbl-3.uceprotect.net ybl.megacity.org

======================================================================= Address 68.142.225.207 is listed on the following DNSBLs:

unconfirmed.dsbl.org bl.redhatgate.com blackhole.compu.net blacklist.spambag.org multihop.dsbl.org pm0-no-more.compu.net block.blars.org dnsbl.jammconsulting.com dnsbl.regedit64.net ybl.megacity.org

- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 06:31:36PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:

...

bl.redhatgate.com blackhole.compu.net pm0-no-more.compu.net dnsbl.regedit64.net dnsbl-3.uceprotect.net ybl.megacity.org

Teaches us not to use these ;-)

That's only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. From that 122 RBLs I mentioned, I actually only use 3 regularly, and another 2 in some specially sensitive servers:

sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org relays.ordb.org dnsbl.njabl.org

and

bl.spamcop.net dnsbl.njabl.org

Even my best servers will still show listed on 5 or 6 RBLs. Usually those same 6 above.

- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)

Rodrigo Barbosa wrote on Tue, 22 Aug 2006 14:38:57 -0300:

These other two, where the centos server is listed, seem to be active and working:

dnsbl-3.uceprotect.net ybl.megacity.org

Ah, just found your addendum. Yes, these are up. I made the mistake of just looking them up instead of doing a query to them. Usually, there's a www presence under the same hostname to advertise the policy.

Kai

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:23:35AM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:

What RBL lookup do you use? It seems to be unreliable. There *are* RBLs which just list *every* IP they don't have business with, but the above don't belong in this category, they are just dead. I recommend using this one: http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/ip4r.ch?ip=

I use one of my own. There are several RBLs nor included by dnsstuff, and since I need to run some very detailed checks, it is not enough.

[]s

- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)