Re: question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Robson Caetano
Hi, Thanks for the reply. > It isn't fault proof, but you should do it anyway. OK. I wil do it and I will follow your suggestion. But, can you tell what happens when spamd-setup does fail to fetch the blacklist? I mean, will the list be kept empty or will it not be updated? Regards, Robson.

Re: question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Matthew Weigel
On Thu, 21 May 2009 19:37:58 + (UTC), Stuart Henderson wrote: > As long as people pick their own value for the minutes column, there > will be some reasonable kind of spread. Are the majority of people not > doing this anyway? (actually, I guess probably not or this thread > wouldn't have com

Re: question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2009-05-21, Markus Hennecke wrote: > Matthew Weigel schrieb: >> On Thu, 21 May 2009 12:54:30 + (UTC), Stuart Henderson >> wrote: >>> On 2009-05-21, Robson Caetano wrote: The problem is that changing the time of the hour or of the day you fetch the blacklist will avoid concurrenc

Re: question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Markus Hennecke
Matthew Weigel schrieb: On Thu, 21 May 2009 12:54:30 + (UTC), Stuart Henderson wrote: On 2009-05-21, Robson Caetano wrote: The problem is that changing the time of the hour or of the day you fetch the blacklist will avoid concurrency but is not fault proof. It isn't fault proof, but you

Re: question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Matthew Weigel
On Thu, 21 May 2009 12:54:30 + (UTC), Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2009-05-21, Robson Caetano wrote: >> The problem is that changing the time of the hour or of the day you >> fetch the blacklist will avoid concurrency but is not fault proof. > > It isn't fault proof, but you should do it any

Re: question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2009-05-21, Robson Caetano wrote: > The problem is that changing the time of the hour or of the day you > fetch the blacklist will avoid concurrency but is not fault proof. It isn't fault proof, but you should do it anyway.

Re: question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Robson Caetano
Hi, Thanks for your reply. > the blacklists at the same time. I changed the time on my servers > and the fetch problems went away. I will try that. But I think it will be good to know how spamd behaves when it does not suceeed fetching the blacklist. I have the feeling that it uses an empty lis

Re: question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Markus Hennecke
Robson Caetano wrote: I am running OpenBSD 4.4 and spamd on a bridge. Every now and then, I look at the logs and see that spamd-setup has some timed out attempts to get blacklists, like: Getting http://www.openbsd.org/spamd/traplist.gz ftp: connect: Connection timed out Spamd-setup runs on hour

question about spamd behaviour

2009-05-21 Thread Robson Caetano
Hi, I am running OpenBSD 4.4 and spamd on a bridge. Every now and then, I look at the logs and see that spamd-setup has some timed out attempts to get blacklists, like: Getting http://www.openbsd.org/spamd/traplist.gz ftp: connect: Connection timed out Spamd-setup runs on hourly basis. Since we