[BALUG-Admin] postmaster.rfc-clueless.org firstname.lastname@example.org
Mon Oct 9 00:35:53 PDT 2017
So, checking further, some bits I note/find:
if ... it is permissible to reject the null-envelope ('<>') to the
postmaster address. However, doing so may prevent you from completing
the unlisting process
... testing up through null (<>) sender, both IPv4 and IPv6,
after an initial temp failure (graylist - expected - delay of 120 seconds),
we have ... from some rather minimal legal testing - and quite the
same for both IPv4 and IPv6 ...
$ telnet 18.104.22.168 25
250 balug-sf-lug-v2.balug.org Hello tigger.mpaoli.net [22.214.171.124]
354 Enter message, ending with "." on a line by itself
not an empty body (IPv4)
550-Invalid message header syntax.
checking exim4 logs, we have ...
2017-10-09 00:19:43 ... F=<> rejected after DATA: Sender : missing or
malformed local part: failing address in "From:" header is: <>
So, probably some overly aggressive anti-spam from eximconfig
within exim4 MTA configuration ... I'll see what I find.
And that may not be what caused the listing to have occurred ...
but it may be sufficient to prevent delisting.
> From: "Michael Paoli" <Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu>
> Subject: Re: [BALUG-Admin] DNSBL: lists.balug.org
> Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2017 23:42:19 -0700
> Thanks, checking into it ...
> looks like they have @balug.org listed for (allegedly) not
> accepting email to email@example.com,
> the others are listed "indirectly" ... apparently they're
> automagically listed as being subdomains of @balug.org (and
> perhaps also with the criterial that @balug.org is a domain
> that is supposed to accept email).
> I did retest, seems to accept email to firstname.lastname@example.org just
> fine. But I'll check further. The only bits I can think of
> (and if so, may find in logs or through further testing),
> graylisting - shouldn't be an issue, but perhaps false positives
> from that? False positives from "spam" rejection? - only
> particular known issue is blank body rejection - but that would
> only show with an actual submission attempt, including (and concluding)
> with a blank body (or one that evaluated to blank/empty, after
> stripping out embedded images and the like).
> Anyway, will review relevant logs and test further. I believe it also
> works fine on both IPv4 and IPv6 ... in any case, will check further
> and see if I can get it cleared up.
> That seems to be the only blacklist (purported) issue, and just
> with the one domain (and subdomains "guilty" by association).
> Also, at this point, @temp.balug.org should no longer be
> originating (and SPF data was suitably updated earlier), but it
> should still be accepting fine. Since it should be no longer be
> originating at all, if there's anything that's
> specific to @temp.balug.org (and not "mere" guilt by association
> with @balug.org), that's probably at most low priority issue
> on blacklist(s) or the like.
>> From: "Rick Moen" <email@example.com>
>> Subject: [BALUG-Admin] DNSBL: lists.balug.org
>> Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 21:56:50 -0700
>> Michael P.:
>> I periodically check my mail server IP on http://multirbl.valli.org/
>> and/or http://www.dnsbl.info/ , to make sure it's not on any blocklist.
>> (It was recently on one for cryptic reasons. When I politely inquired
>> and stressed that I'd be glad to fix any problem but didn't understand
>> the existing one, the listing was removed without comment.)
>> $ host lists.balug.org
>> lists.balug.org has address 126.96.36.199
>> lists.balug.org has IPv6 address 2001:470:1f04:19e::2
>> lists.balug.org mail is handled by 100 mx.lists.balug.org.
>> http://multirbl.valli.org/lookup/188.8.131.52.html shows that one
>> cluster of blocklists, the rfc-clueless.org one, doesn't like your IP.
>> This is the successor to Derek Balling's rfc-ignorant.org DNSBL, which
>> Derek eventually shut down, and has the same mission. The listing
>> policy is here: http://rfc-clueless.org/pages/listing_policy
>> Looks like they believe that 184.108.40.206 isn't accepting mail to
>> postmaster. an RFC requirement for any FQDN that deals in SMTP
>> When I did a quick check telneting to 25/tcp, it seems to me that the
>> system _was_ going to accept my manually composed mail to
>> firstname.lastname@example.org -- so I'm unclear on why that listing's
>> Seems like they also have no-postmaster listings for FQDNs
>> balug-sf-lug-v2.balug.org, balug.org, and temp.balug.org. Maybe you
>> should actually cease accepting mail for those FQDNs.
More information about the BALUG-Admin