Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ckuka

  • Rank
  1. Oh, I am just glad I wasn't wrong .... this one resolved too! Christoph
  2. After the first connection you were using Spamcop is just the first were I realize problems - all other blocks because of this reason was spam. So I'll leave on, let's see. Christoph
  3. I'm running Postfix, so in my main.cf I commented out "reject_unknown_hostname" from either "smtpd_recipient_restrictions =" or "smtpd_helo_restrictions =". Forced a Postfix reload, and then in spamcop mailhosts I added my server. After that i put that restriction back in the main.cf, postfix reload, everything fine. Regarding the wrong helo from spamcop: When adding a new Mailhost Spamcop sends a mail to that server connecting from sc-app5.ironport.com but says "helo sc-app5.soma.ironport.com" which doesn't fit. Postfix therefore answers "Helo command rejected: Host not found;". That's the point. "Don" (Spamcop admin?) told me, they're working on it ... Maybe that helps ... Christoph
  4. Steven, you used two different hosts for telnet access, one is part of a njabl blocked network the other is not. with the host not beeing blocked you got the error above, but I can't see a second try from this host in my logs. All other attempts where coming from the blocked host. Christoph
  5. Things are now clear for me: Spamcop uses a different helo command in relation to the host that actually connects, maybe this is some kind of forgotten setting from a former server change. So I took out the helo rule for some minutes to complete the mailhosts configuration, that worked. Spamcop Admins know about this issue, they say they're working on it - so maybe others won't have that problem in the future. What made me thought about my configuration is, that others don't seem to have that problem - does helo not play a role in preventing unwanted mail? I don't know. So far - thanks a lot for all that good thoughts especially to steven! Cu, Christoph
  6. I did it, now ... Thx, Christoph
  7. It is not. You were doing different things. I can see three attempts connecting with underwood.spamcop.net all of them where blocked because of the IP range being listed at njabl. You can't know if you would have been accepted, because you where listed in njabl. The check for a correct helo comes beyond that, even if you receive a 250 for your helo. Here's a session I did from a host that's not part of a dynamic IP network sending a wrong helo like spamcop does: If everything is fine it looks like this (same host, right helo): There was one other connection trying to send a mail from underwood[at]spamcop.net but that connection came from kopinproxy.kopin.com which is not listed in njabl because of not being part of a dynamic IP range. that's why you got different answers. BTW the attempt via the proxythingy domain was testing if the server accepts email sent to unknown recipients and got an error message therefor. So far, there're some things I'm sure about: Spamcop tries to send mailhosts mail via a helo command that is some kind of wrong in relation to the host it connects from. My server doesn't accept such connections and I'm not thinking that's wrong in the moment (please tell me why that is a not so good behavior ). Also, all attempts I know from where you were connecting to my server have failed because of the different reasons mentioned above. So, we are where we were. As far as I know my server is behaving correct - why does Spamcop Mailhosts send a wrong helo? That's all we have to know about. If that could be fixed everyone would be happy. Is there a reason for doing this? see above. nothing changed - you can be sure. Thank you for your work on this. Christoph
  8. [at]Steven, Absolut! Many times! What I found in the mail log: Why does spamcop do a wrong "helo"? It inserts a "soma." in the address, postfix tries to resolve this, but he can't, because this host doesn't exist. The host connecting should be identical to the host mentioned in the helo command, shouldn't it? So, without the "soma." it should work, or am I understanding something wrong? Why do you get that answer - you should have a different IP? (Am I misunderstanding you?) [at]Wazoo You're so right - I realized that seconds after posting the first time ... - I wish could change the Username ... Christoph
  9. Steve, I tried to do the same session you did. Mine looked as follows: 220 kukaserver.de ESMTP helo foo.bar 502 Error: command not implemented helo foo.bar 250 kukaserver.de mail from 501 Syntax: MAIL FROM: <address> mail from: foo[at]bar.foo 250 Ok rcpt to: web1p1[at]kukaserver.de 554 Service unavailable; Client host [] blocked using dynablock.njabl.org; Dynamic/Residential IP range listed by NJABL dynablock - http://njabl.org/dynablock.html (blocking occurs because of accessing from an dial-in account.) so it shows that the first helo command always gets a 502 error, but when entered again it acks with an 250 - I don't know if this is normal behavior, maybe it's because I'm accessing via putty, it's an postfix standart-installation and I'm getting email everyday ... why is this an error? shouldn't it be that way? a 250 is an acknowledgement, isn't it? christoph
  10. Steve, thank you for your reply. so: what data you need? I was just aware of telling the world my email address ... so I'll do it now - please tell me if I should take it out again to protect myself ... it is spamcop et kuka dot tv or web1p1 et kukaserver dot de ... hope that helps. I think that's a correct response because you should use "helo" instead of "help", don't you? What you think? Christoph
  11. Hello all, I hope someone will help me.. here are the Details: Since I changed the server, the IP address changed and other things too, so I decided to delete all my mailhosts and start over. I typed in my address at "foo[at]bar.com" gave it a name "bar" and on the next page the proper MX showed up: "bar.com (10)". So I continued to the next page where I to read this: This hard to understand for me, since I'm receiving mails on the server all the time, from spamcop too - so, here's the question (took a time, ehh?): What am I doing wrong? Thanks a lot! Christoph