Re: uncooperative DNSBLs, was several messages

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, David Romerstein wrote:

I believe that it's listed 'correctly', per that FAQ, for one reason:

CNAME, not PTR. SORBS *appears* to want PTRs (with appropriate TTLs).

Following up to myself (bad form!), I'm mistaken. This IP was probably originally listed because it's in a huge swath of hostnames with generic rDNS. I submitted a ticket to have it delisted, was rejected by the robot, and found (in discussion w/the SORBS admin[1]) that a DNS lookup on that IP failed:

[86400] 141.17.85.65.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer newgate.xpasc.com.
Host 142.17.85.65.in-addr.arpa query failed: Connection Timed Out
[86400] 143.17.85.65.in-addr.arpa CNAME pointer 65.85.17.143.xpasc.com.

(Interestingly, out of the whole /24, that's the only lookup that failed)

There's a 48 hour timeout before a new request for this IP can be submitted. If this host appears in anyone's MX record, let me know - that can push this request to a different queue.

-- D

[1] SORBS' admin, who answered by despite being on a well-deserved holiday
_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]