> (or similar) config.
I refer to it by name, but...
john@nimbus:~$ host spamd.lon.bitfolk.com
spamd.lon.bitfolk.com has address 212.13.194.5
john@nimbus:~$
I tried again from another host to make sure it wasn't in my cache and
got the same result.
John
From mike@??? Sun Sep 18 16:57:34 2011
Received: from exprod6og102.obsmtp.com ([64.18.1.183])
by bitfolk.com with smtp (Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from <mike@???>) id 1R5KgP-0007B1-5o
for users@???; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:57:34 +0000
Received: from mail-ww0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]) (using TLSv1) by
exprod6ob102.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP
ID DSNKTnYi+WoY0YeQoYnjPtcsMIvsOhWZXvNA@???;
Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:57:32 PDT
Received: by wwe32 with SMTP id 32so6809948wwe.29
for <users@???>; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:57:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zanker.org; s=google;
h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=Auc2CidgyerI/KajtuaGZdFr4SlUAVWslLi7kXunDl4=;
b=EpkV7NqAmaHqayhE1eAQGARnoz2JOpNFKe83yRVitTmCUB3M83a2jY1QOxwUxZAZ1a
cbWs8t7e8GQ3SIQgHlw96MrA9C0ijaEay0SQ4/usDxdki/7xpyyZjvyPVkLbETSXm4+m
IBEiNrYsObt4idhbir0BK+3wn4TUnNFBBdifc=
Received: by 10.227.145.13 with SMTP id b13mr1734675wbv.27.1316365047901;
Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:57:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.34]
(host109-149-73-28.range109-149.btcentralplus.com. [109.149.73.28])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fq9sm22027228wbb.15.2011.09.18.09.57.26
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:57:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E7622F5.7050203@???>
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:57:25 +0100
From: Mike Zanker <mike@???>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6;
rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: users@???
References: <20110918151111.GD4077@???>
<4E7620F5.4070301@???>
In-Reply-To: <4E7620F5.4070301@???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanner: Scanned by ClamAV on bitfolk.com at Sun,
18 Sep 2011 16:57:33 +0000
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 64.18.1.183
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mike@???
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
spamd3.lon.bitfolk.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-ASN: AS26910 64.18.1.0/24
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
DKIM_VALID_AU, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,
SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Report: * -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
* medium trust
* [64.18.1.183 listed in list.dnswl.org]
* -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
* -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's * domain
* -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
* 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily
* valid
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:14:11 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on bitfolk.com)
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] spamd.lon.bitfolk.com renumbered;
old IP address will stop responding on Tuesday 18th October 2011
X-BeenThere: users@???
