Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D2379FB353 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:24:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 68963-09 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:23:59 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3879F9F991C for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:24:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E47EB47024 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:24:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24510-09; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:24:00 -0300 (ADT) Received: from fserv.hub.org (blk-137-93-67.eastlink.ca [24.137.93.67]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78ABCB47006; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:24:00 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (unknown [192.168.1.2]) by fserv.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46888CE40; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:24:00 -0300 (ADT) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:23:50 -0300 From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: "Joshua D. Drake" cc: Magnus Hagander , Andrew Sullivan , pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Mail setup broken (still/again?) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20071016101330.10647f7d@scratch> References: <20071016085209.GD22159@svr2.hagander.net> <20071016140750.GF3255@crankycanuck.ca> <3509D6C66029EDED469CF3C0@ganymede.hub.org> <4714EAE4.6030004@hagander.net> <4714EE66.6020005@hagander.net> <8973E293B7A0AA4DC40D2766@ganymede.hub.org> <20071016101330.10647f7d@scratch> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200710/114 X-Sequence-Number: 12701 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:13:30 -0700 "Joshua D. Drake" wrote: > So why haven't we just blocked mx3.cc.teu.ac.jp at the firewall? Several reasons, but foremost ... until Magnus pointed out the need to change 450 -> 550, nobody knew they were hitting us ... but, I just checked the log file, and that is the only address that that host has tried to get through, so would be a bit overkill to block one host for retrying one address repeatedly because we didn't tell them it was a permanent failure vs temporary one, no? :) - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHFPOm4QvfyHIvDvMRAlOpAJ4sYXvzcv4yV/q6sionUvxmUjzxnwCdEw1J Lg5S/QQ321e7t/F2cMZHL/I= =lhKG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----