Log message from WLIST tracing

Matus UHLAR - fantomas uhlar@fantomas.sk
Thu Apr 1 14:54:14 UTC 2010


> > > From: Gary Mills 
> > 
> > > I have all of the local IP addresses (512 /24 networks) defined in the
> > > file localnets.wh that's included into the whitelist file.  So, they
> > > are defined on the server side, not on the client side.  Is that
> > > alright?

> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 02:43:38PM +0000, Vernon Schryver wrote:
> > Client-side DCC whitelisting is almost always cheaper, faster, and
> > generally better.  Even when server-side whitelisting is useful,
> > you almost always want the same mail whitelisted by DCC clients,
> > which makes the server-side whitelist entries moot.
> > Some whitelisting must be done by DCC clients.  An example is the
> > MX or MXDCC whitelisting by one MX server of other MX servers for
> > a domain name.  Or the SUBMIT whitelisting of SMTP submission clients.

On 01.04.10 08:27, Gary Mills wrote:
> Okay, I tried that on my test server running dcc-1.3.122 and got
> this error:
> 
>     Apr  1 08:18:20 setup01 dccm[14901]: [ID 702911 mail.error] too many IP address blocks in line 513 of localnets.wh included from whiteclnt
> 
> The file contains 512 /24 networks plus 127.0.0.1

I wonder if you can't aggregate them into one /15 or two /16 ranges.

and, btw, is there real need for whitelisting all your IP addresses?
I mean, do your users send to many bulk messages that you need whitelist
them all?
DCC could be used to block user-generated spam imho...

-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
M$ Win's are shit, do not use it !



More information about the DCC mailing list

Contact vjs@rhyolite.com by mail or use the form.