8.0.2 Community Edition - no longer allows SMTP auth users send email - RBL blocked

[16439dvirt]

[quote user="quanah"]cd /opt/zimbra/conf/zmconfigd

grep zimbraMtaRestrictionRBLs smtpd_recipient_restrictions.cf
The code does not lie. The documentation is clearly wrong, and the Admin console is clearly broken.
--Quanah[/QUOTE]
It's not been clear at all to the rest of us in this thread. Still isn't to me.:

zmprov ms `hostname` +zimbraMtaRestrictionRBLs zen.spamhaus.org

	ERROR: account.INVALID_ATTR_NAME (invalid attr name: invalid attr name - unable to modify attributes: zimbraMtaRestrictionRBLs: attribute type undefined)

So can you file a bug with the details, including a "clear" explanation of the problem & solution to follow?

[mfehr]

This is what I discovered and what helped me to create the work around after I upgraded from 8.0.0 to 8.0.2 on Ubuntu 10.04
Issue description:

• Mail delivery from the local network worked fine
  
  
• Mail delivery from external was rejected. The file /var/log/mail.info documents the rejection of the mail by zen.spamhaus.org
  
  
• Changing the RBL zen.spamhaus.org to sbl.spamhaus.org or removing it entirely from the admin console has no effect
  
  

Resolved with:

$ zmprov mcf zimbraMtaRestriction "reject_rbl_client sbl.spamhaus.org"

(No server restart required)
Validated with:

In order to ensure that no configuration values overwrite the applied change, I did a server restart, followed by a read of the configuration value fo zimbraMtaRestriction

$ zmcontrol restart

$ zmprov gacf | grep zimbraMtaRestriction

zimbraMtaRestriction: reject_rbl_client sbl.spamhaus.org

$ 

Observation:

I also observed that the zimbra admin page shows wrong information. Although the value was changed from zen.spamhaus.org to sbl.spamhaus.org and working like this, the admin console still shows the RBL list of zen.spamhaus.org

[17126thunder04]

[quote user="mfehr"]I also observed that the zimbra admin page shows wrong information. Although the value was changed from zen.spamhaus.org to sbl.spamhaus.org and working like this, the admin console still shows the RBL list of zen.spamhaus.org[/QUOTE]
That is actually not the case for me. If I make a change via CLI as so:

zmprov mcf -zimbraMtaRestriction "reject_rbl_client xbl.spamhaus.org"

OR

zmprov mcf +zimbraMtaRestriction "reject_rbl_client sbl.spamhaus.org"

The admin console updates correctly. Vice versa...if I make changes via the admin console, they reflect as entries like the above. The trouble I was having earlier in the thread seems to have been a fluke.

[ccelis5215]

[QUOTE] The trouble I was having earlier in the thread seems to have been a fluke.[/QUOTE]
Don't think so... as https://bugzilla.zimbra.com/show_bug.cgi?id=79415#c15 there's a bug .
ccelis

[17126thunder04]

[quote user="ccelis5215"]Don't think so... as https://bugzilla.zimbra.com/show_bug.cgi?id=79415#c15 there's a bug .
ccelis[/QUOTE]
I mean with adding/removing RBLs through the Admin Console. It stopped working, then after I removed the bad RBL via CLI, adding/removing RBLs via the Admin Console seems to have worked ever since.

[ccelis5215]

Hi thunder04,
Understood, my point it's there's a bug already, verified by quanah and pointed by 8.0.3.
ccelis

[quanah]

[quote user="16439dvirt"]It's not been clear at all to the rest of us in this thread. Still isn't to me.:

zmprov ms `hostname` +zimbraMtaRestrictionRBLs zen.spamhaus.org

	ERROR: account.INVALID_ATTR_NAME (invalid attr name: invalid attr name - unable to modify attributes: zimbraMtaRestrictionRBLs: attribute type undefined)

So can you file a bug with the details, including a "clear" explanation of the problem & solution to follow?[/QUOTE]
Heh, I was incorrect... After looking further, that is an internal attribute created by zmconfigd from zimbraMtaRestrictionRBLs :P

[lodac]

I did not see this thread until now. I see that the issue I documented was also happening in this one.
Bug 79628 – zimbraMTAMyNetworks not honored with reject_unknown_client_hostname

[tharangamu]

Dear All
Any positive reply for this issue. same problem we are facing. :-(.

[phoenix]

[quote user="tharangamu"]Any positive reply for this issue. same problem we are facing. :-(.[/QUOTE]You mean apart from the fact that the fix will be in 8.0.3 or that there's a fix in the bug report?