Possible to Use DNS Name for Source Address?

[chmcwill]

Couldn't find anything about this, tried to add the DNS name (which has like 100 IP's addresses) as a source address and it didn't like it ... seems like there may not be an option to use a DNS name instead of an exhaustive list of IP addresses for the Firewall rules?

If not, I assume the same would hold true for the Port Forwarding, if we can use a DNS name in the Firewall, then I guess we can't use one in the Port Forwarding either, right?

[jcoffin]

As a session comes in, there is no domain name, only IP address. There is no reason for a rule condition which the information does not exist at the time the session arrives.

[chmcwill]

Got it, how many IP's can be saved into a single Firewall rule? As in individual, ranges, etc.

[jcoffin]

There is no code limit but there is a practical limit based on load and hardware limits. What is your scenario? There might be a better way.

[chmcwill]

Switching to a new email gateway, if you do a NSlookup on delivery.antispamcloud.com, you'll get the list of IP addresses. I'm open to a better way than having to manually add each of them to a rule or group into multiple rules, etc.

[jcoffin]

I would reject all but from delivery.antispamcloud.com on the Exchange SMTP setting.

[sky-knight]

Yeah, make your mail server do that lifting.

[chmcwill]

I'll check further but I'm only seeing an option to add IP addresses or ranges into the Ant-Spam hub transport under Exchange Server which defeats the object of the process as I would prefer to block on the firewall, especially if I'm going to have to enter the IP addresses anyway.