-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Thursday 2005-06-30 at 06:55 -0800, Greg Wallace wrote:
He said he was using his ISP relay server, and that is true, you can see it in the posted headers.
That's not the problem. The problem is spamassassin in SuSE's server classifying his email as spam.
OK. I thought --
DNS_FROM_RFC_POST was complaining about there being no domain DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS was complaining there being no name
in "from [192.168.121.33]", when usually you see "from joe@somewebsite.com [nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn], where I would think joe would be DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS and somewebsite.com would be DNS_FROM_RFC_POST
The oficial description of those two SA reports are these (from '/usr/share/spamassassin/20_dnsbl_tests.cf'): describe DNS_FROM_RFC_POST Envelope sender in postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org describe DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS Envelope sender in whois.rfc-ignorant.org And, the "envelope sender" is the adress included in this header: |> Return-Path: <art.fore at comcast.net> Therefore, what those two reports are saying, strictly speaking, is that comcast.net is listed in both postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org and whois.rfc-ignorant.org lists, nothing more. Why they have been included is another issue. But there is nothing in the report related to the IP 192.168.121.33, nothing at all. That IP, not knowing the exact network architecture of art.fore machine, is probably his local network address, and it is normal. - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFCxEkxtTMYHG2NR9URAgvtAJ9qulgHxwefNn0jFQVTLXxBoAov5wCfRk+v rXLHzQus9E8Fp8tkCnvcS9U= =ijkj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----