Re: Usage mistake with dnswl.org

[Sydney Meyer <sydney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 12/20/22 01:45, Bernd H. Steiner wrote:
> Am 20.12.2022 um 01:01 schrieb Sydney Meyer:
>
> > > "The query must always go to the zone “list.dnswl.org” in standard 
> > > DNSBL format, ie with a reversed dotted quad IP address. To query 
> > > whether the IP address “1.2.3.4” is listed, the query would thus be
> > >
> > > 4.3.2.1.list.dnswl.org"
> > >
> > > (no domain query at all)
> > Does this mean, that the query would then have no implication about a 
> > ostensibly "missmatching" ip/domain rule as there is no such relation 
> > or it does not apply?
>
> Where should in this query be space for the domain information of the 
> corresponding DNSWL ID? 

Nowhere, of course. (looking to the ground)


> A *complete* query and answer looks for example like
>
> testuser:~ > host 5.3.1.44.list.dnswl.org
> 5.3.1.44.list.dnswl.org has address 127.0.10.0
>
> And based on this information (127.0.10.0) a scoring can be done by 
> e.g. spamassassin.

I think, i'm beginning to understand both, how frustrating this must be 
for you, Bernd, and that the removal from dnswl was pointless as it has 
no impact on the misunderstanding, that i have falsely thought to be an 
issue.

This is indeed a case of both, did not RTFM and an honest mistake, as 
stupid as it sounds.


> regards
> bernd

The correct approach here were to create a single dnswl-id and add my 3 
domains and the two ip-addresses of the smtp-relays to the _one_ 
dnswl-id. Is that correct?


best regards,

Sydney