Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [HEADS UP] remove ordb from your systems

Expand Messages
  • D Hill
    ... Yet it was posted on _SEVERAL_ lists the RBL was going to be shutting down. It was even posted on this list by Victor:
    Message 1 of 10 , Apr 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, 1 Apr 2008 at 15:23 +0100, Jacqui.caren@... confabulated:

      > Frog wrote:
      >> mouss wrote:
      >>
      >>> For those who didn't see it, ordb now returns a positive result for every
      >>> query. If you have
      >>> reject_rbl_client relays.ordb.org
      >>> you should disable it. Also check other software and hardware (appliances,
      >>> ...) that may be using it. (Are Symantec and others inundated with support
      >>> calls?).
      >>>
      >>> ordb was discontinued more than a year ago, so this action is
      >>> understandable and there is nothing to complain about (of you course, you
      >>> can still complain to yourself or to your vendor ;-p)
      >>>
      >> Hello,
      >>
      >> I just noticed that the documentation on the Postfix site still refers to
      >> relays.ordb.org which may cause some confusion if it isn't changed.
      >>
      >> The specific page where I saw it is http://www.postfix.org/uce.html
      >
      > It is a bit sad that a dead RBL has to go to the trouble of +ve
      > listings for everyone just to stop people using it.

      Yet it was posted on _SEVERAL_ lists the RBL was going to be shutting
      down. It was even posted on this list by Victor:

      http://groups.google.com/group/list.postfix.users/browse_thread/thread/4c09f2efc22001d7/82008dc42f4982f8?lnk=gst&q=ordb#82008dc42f4982f8

      > Hmm, perhaps ATT/BT/yahoo's 'new' filter engine included ordb? :-)
      > It would explain why people could not even email themselves!
      >
      > Jacqui
      >
    • mouss
      ... There seems to be no other way to get the knockers to stop. millions of DNS queries aren t free when you re the one who receive them. ... I am not aware of
      Message 2 of 10 , Apr 1, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Jacqui Caren wrote:
        > Frog wrote:
        >> mouss wrote:
        >>
        >>> For those who didn't see it, ordb now returns a positive result for
        >>> every query. If you have
        >>> reject_rbl_client relays.ordb.org
        >>> you should disable it. Also check other software and hardware
        >>> (appliances, ...) that may be using it. (Are Symantec and others
        >>> inundated with support calls?).
        >>>
        >>> ordb was discontinued more than a year ago, so this action is
        >>> understandable and there is nothing to complain about (of you
        >>> course, you can still complain to yourself or to your vendor ;-p)
        >>>
        >> Hello,
        >>
        >> I just noticed that the documentation on the Postfix site still
        >> refers to relays.ordb.org which may cause some confusion if it isn't
        >> changed.
        >>
        >> The specific page where I saw it is http://www.postfix.org/uce.html
        >
        > It is a bit sad that a dead RBL has to go to the trouble of +ve
        > listings for everyone just to stop people using it.

        There seems to be no other way to get the knockers to stop. millions of
        DNS queries aren't free when you're the one who receive them.

        >
        > Hmm, perhaps ATT/BT/yahoo's 'new' filter engine included ordb? :-)

        I am not aware of any problems at these sites. In particular, I didn't
        notice any problem with yahoo.

        > It would explain why people could not even email themselves!
      • mouss
        ... did you miss the first line of that page? It says: * Note: this web page is no longer maintained. It exists only to avoid breaking links in web pages that
        Message 3 of 10 , Apr 2, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Frog wrote:
          > mouss wrote:
          >> For those who didn't see it, ordb now returns a positive result for
          >> every query. If you have
          >> reject_rbl_client relays.ordb.org
          >> you should disable it. Also check other software and hardware
          >> (appliances, ...) that may be using it. (Are Symantec and others
          >> inundated with support calls?).
          >>
          >> ordb was discontinued more than a year ago, so this action is
          >> understandable and there is nothing to complain about (of you course,
          >> you can still complain to yourself or to your vendor ;-p)
          >>
          > Hello,
          >
          > I just noticed that the documentation on the Postfix site still refers
          > to relays.ordb.org which may cause some confusion if it isn't changed.
          >
          > The specific page where I saw it is http://www.postfix.org/uce.html
          >
          > It is listed under header checks and examples.

          did you miss the first line of that page? It says:

          * Note: this web page is no longer maintained. It exists only to avoid
          breaking links in web pages that describe earlier versions of the
          Postfix mail system.


          *
        • Colin Campbell
          Hi, ... Are you sure it s still positive ? I found an old mail server rejecting a lot of (mostly) spam with: 554 Service unavailable; Client host
          Message 4 of 10 , Apr 2, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi,

            On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 22:59 +0200, mouss wrote:
            > Frog wrote:
            > > mouss wrote:
            > >> For those who didn't see it, ordb now returns a positive result for
            > >> every query.

            Are you sure it's still "positive"? I found an old mail server rejecting
            a lot of (mostly) spam with:

            554 Service unavailable; Client host [76.77.65.218] blocked using
            relays.ordb.org; ordb.org was shut down on December 18, 2006. Please
            remove from your mailserver.;

            so I removed ordb from it.

            Colin
            --
            Colin Campbell
            Unix Support/Postmaster/Hostmaster
            Citec
            +61 7 3227 6334
          • mouss
            ... positive as in yes, it is listed .
            Message 5 of 10 , Apr 2, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Colin Campbell wrote:
              > Hi,
              >
              > On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 22:59 +0200, mouss wrote:
              >
              >> Frog wrote:
              >>
              >>> mouss wrote:
              >>>
              >>>> For those who didn't see it, ordb now returns a positive result for
              >>>> every query.
              >>>>
              >
              > Are you sure it's still "positive"?

              positive as in "yes, it is listed".

              > I found an old mail server rejecting
              > a lot of (mostly) spam with:
              >
              > 554 Service unavailable; Client host [76.77.65.218] blocked using
              > relays.ordb.org; ordb.org was shut down on December 18, 2006. Please
              > remove from your mailserver.;
              >
              > so I removed ordb from it.
              >
            • Colin Campbell
              Hi, ... Thanks, silly me interpreted positive as okay (not listed). Colin ... -- Colin Campbell Unix Support/Postmaster/Hostmaster Citec +61 7 3227 6334
              Message 6 of 10 , Apr 2, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi,

                On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 00:51 +0200, mouss wrote:
                > Colin Campbell wrote:
                > > Hi,
                > >
                > > On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 22:59 +0200, mouss wrote:
                > >
                > >> Frog wrote:
                > >>
                > >>> mouss wrote:
                > >>>
                > >>>> For those who didn't see it, ordb now returns a positive result for
                > >>>> every query.
                > >>>>
                > >
                > > Are you sure it's still "positive"?
                >
                > positive as in "yes, it is listed".

                Thanks, silly me interpreted "positive" as "okay" (not listed).

                Colin

                >
                > > I found an old mail server rejecting
                > > a lot of (mostly) spam with:
                > >
                > > 554 Service unavailable; Client host [76.77.65.218] blocked using
                > > relays.ordb.org; ordb.org was shut down on December 18, 2006. Please
                > > remove from your mailserver.;
                > >
                > > so I removed ordb from it.
                > >
                >
                >
                --
                Colin Campbell
                Unix Support/Postmaster/Hostmaster
                Citec
                +61 7 3227 6334
              • Frog
                mouss wrote:. ... Yes indeed I did miss it because I never saw it. (see below) ... It s rather pointless putting such a tiny insignificant disclaimer that is
                Message 7 of 10 , Apr 2, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  mouss wrote:.
                  >
                  > did you miss the first line of that page? It says:
                  >
                  Yes indeed I did miss it because I never saw it. (see below)
                  > * Note: this web page is no longer maintained. It exists only to avoid
                  > breaking links in web pages that describe earlier versions of the
                  > Postfix mail
                  It's rather pointless putting such a tiny insignificant disclaimer that
                  is barely noticible at the top of a page especially when one does not
                  even see the top of the page to begin with.

                  Why does one not see the top of the page you might ask?

                  Because google sent me to an anchored link:
                  http://www.postfix.org/uce.html#header_checks

                  My suggestion was to remove a single line from the examples to prevent
                  someone using it in error. Pointing to a stupid disclaimer does not
                  resolve that issue especially as in my case I never saw it to begin
                  with. As no doubt many others will not see it either.

                  If your documentation is outdated the why is such a page so obviously
                  available as in the mainstream documentation?

                  If it is depreciated then maybe the URL could point to something a
                  little less official looking. Maybe something like /old/use.html.

                  These are merely my observations and experiences. No doubt you feel
                  empowered by pointing out what you think as the obvious.

                  Regards
                  Frog
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.