From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 27 21:10:05 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0731916A4D1 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:10:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.volant.org (gate.volant.org [207.111.218.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26D943D53 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:10:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from patl@volant.org) Received: from 64-144-229-193.client.dsl.net ([64.144.229.193] helo=[192.168.0.13]) by smtp.volant.org with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD)) id 1BpZCt-0002xT-GG; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:09:57 -0700 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:09:59 -0700 From: Pat Lashley To: Bob Martin Message-ID: <2773213520.1090962599@mccaffrey.phoenix.volant.org> In-Reply-To: <41065E5F.9020108@buckhorn.net> References: <41056580.3050007@wintek.com> <1925363520.1090913171@mccaffrey.phoenix.volant.org> <41065E5F.9020108@buckhorn.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Scan-Signature: ccec3068c2c34a412b04326b5f6d3453a40553ac X-Spam-User: nobody X-Spam-Score: -4.8 (----) X-Spam-Score-Int: -47 X-Spam-Report: This mail has matched the spam-filter tests listed below. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for details about the specific tests reported. In general, the higher the number of total points, the more likely that it actually is spam. (The 'required' number of points listed below is the arbitrary number above which the message is normally considered spam.) Content analysis details: (-4.8 points total, 5.0 required) -4.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.1 AWL AWL: Auto-whitelist adjustment cc: Richard Kuhns cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Question about virus/spam filtering for customers with mail servers X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:10:05 -0000 --On Tuesday, July 27, 2004 08:53:35 -0500 Bob Martin wrote: > The issue here isn't the MTA. It's running a primary server > as a secondary, with the DNS "primary" being unreachable. > > Exim can't fix that, nor postfix or any other MTA. > > The first server to receive the mail should be the primary in DNS. Yes, it should. My response was too terse; I should have made it clear that what is trivial in Exim is setting up a router/ transport to forward the customer's mail to a specific host rather than using MX records. That would completely eliminate the need for an MX record pointing to the customer's server. -Pat