Jump to content

guido90210

Members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About guido90210

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. Yeah... I dunno, the stat is IronPort's - I don't know how they come up with it... I guess from all their appliances out there. Do you mean you couldn't care less? Fer chrissake, let's forget the whole 'justify' issue, and IronPort's statistic along with it Yes, bounces to a spamcop.net spamtrap, apparently.
  2. No, we're using the same dictionary. To quote from http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=justify : "1. to show (an act, claim, statement, etc.) to be just or right: The end does not always justify the means." To have to show that you're right, someone must have claimed that you were wrong. As I said, I don't think that the fact that the server in question has sent out 3 times more traffic on a Monday than a Sunday is 'wrong'. And further on this, the statistic is IronPort's. They don't have a sniffer sitting next to my server, although I would agree that the statistic is a fair indication of the change in traffic coming from this server. The server isn't in any blacklists for sending spam, but regardless of that, to me this statistic bears no relation to whether the server is sending spam or not. I'm well aware that if it does start sending spam (apart from bounces), it will quickly make it into the blacklists. Re: the '50 bank robberies' statement, yes, I know, the server does send bounces. Yes, I'd prefer that it didn't, at least not 'user unknown' bounces. And yes, I'll stop it doing that when I can. Ciao, G.
  3. Well, the server did generate around 3 times the amount of bytes on Monday compared to Sunday. The 'bytes sent out' figure varies by a magnitude of around 3 over the last 10 days - on a weekday, the bytes sent out is around 3 times what it sends out on a weekend, which makes sense, given that there are no staff here on the weekend. Sorry for getting tetchy on the word 'justify', but to me, to 'justify' something means to explain why you've done something wrong. I don't see how the fact that my server has sent 3 times more traffic on a Monday than a Sunday is 'doing something wrong' And after all, apart from sending bounces, the machine isn't sending spam, i.e. it isn't an open relay, and no-one at our workplace sends spam through it. Regards, G.
  4. Ummm... don't know if you meant to use the word 'justify' here... perhaps 'explain'? And no, I can't explain it either. Maybe IronPort could, given that it's their statistic OK, thanks for that - I wasn't aware of that bad address - I'll fix it. Are you saying that it's bounces to this address that caused this host to get listed in the SCBL? OK, message understood. Just thought people might add an acronym or two to my short list for me to go and check out further. Thanks for your reply. Regards, G.
  5. Hi there, One of my organisation's two MXes (203.2.32.108) has been listed in the SpamCop blacklist today, apparently for sending misdirected bounces, according to the lookup tool on the SpamCop website. It's true - that server does send bounced email. It sends bounced email for unknown recipients, and for over-quota local users. We also use vacation messages. I don't yet have recipient whitelisting set up on our MXes, and don't use SPF or DKIM. I'd like to do these things, but I'm a Unix administrator, and email administrator is one of the many hats that I wear. Anyway... I'd like to know if it's possible to find out exactly which bounces are causing me to get into the SCBL? Is there a web-based interface to do this? Also, can I find out if there are any user reports that have been lodged for this box? Finally, a bit off-topic, but what measures would the gentle readers suggest for reducing bounces, other than recipient whitelisting, SPF and DKIM? Thanks in advance, G.
×