Re: DNS MX Question [OT]

Lindsay Haisley wrote: On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 22:06 -0800, Marc Perkel wrote: Dave Funk wrote: Yes, it -is- that simple. ;) Not recommended for normal use but if you understand the risks involved, it does work that way. Thanks Dave, but I already tried that and it didn't work

Re: DNS MX Question [OT]

On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 22:06 -0800, Marc Perkel wrote: > > Dave Funk wrote: > > Yes, it -is- that simple. ;) > > Not recommended for normal use but if you understand the risks involved, > > it does work that way. > > > > > > Thanks Dave, but I already tried that and it didn't work. See

Re: DNS MX Question [OT]

Dave Funk wrote: On Sat, 14 Feb 2009, Marc Perkel wrote: Marc Perkel wrote: Hi, I have a quick bind question. I want to set the MX records on a domain to something normal but I want to set the MX for all subdomains to something else. example.com mail.example.com xxx.example.com blackh

Re: DNS MX Question [OT]

Dave Funk wrote: On Sat, 14 Feb 2009, Marc Perkel wrote: Marc Perkel wrote: Hi, I have a quick bind question. I want to set the MX records on a domain to something normal but I want to set the MX for all subdomains to something else. example.com mail.example.com xxx.example.com blackh

Re: DNS MX Question [OT]

On Sat, 14 Feb 2009, Marc Perkel wrote: Marc Perkel wrote: Hi, I have a quick bind question. I want to set the MX records on a domain to something normal but I want to set the MX for all subdomains to something else. example.com mail.example.com xxx.example.com blackhole.example.com Tha

Re: DNS MX Question [OT]

Marc Perkel wrote: Hi, I have a quick bind question. I want to set the MX records on a domain to something normal but I want to set the MX for all subdomains to something else. example.com mail.example.com xxx.example.com blackhole.example.com Thanks in advance I should be more specif

Re: DNS MX Question [OT]

On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 06:37:14PM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote: > I have a quick bind question. I want to set the MX records on a domain > to something normal but I want to set the MX for all subdomains to > something else. > > example.com mail.example.com > xxx.example.com blackhole.example.com S

Re: DNS MX Question [OT]

On Sat, 14 Feb 2009, Marc Perkel wrote: Hi, I have a quick bind question. I want to set the MX records on a domain to something normal but I want to set the MX for all subdomains to something else. example.com mail.example.com xxx.example.com blackhole.example.com So do just that: exampl

DNS MX Question [OT]

Hi, I have a quick bind question. I want to set the MX records on a domain to something normal but I want to set the MX for all subdomains to something else. example.com mail.example.com xxx.example.com blackhole.example.com Thanks in advance

Re: Last-5-percent tuning

On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 10:42 -0800, Ricardo Kleemann wrote: > >> > Do you use any MTA-level DNSBLs? > >> > >> No. > > > > If you have ample of ressources you can do this. If you are getting > > tenthousands of mails you can't (or won't). We reject about 90% of the > > spam at MTA. That's mostly Bot

Re: Two servers, one database. A question

On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 17:07 -0600, Michael Parker wrote: > On Feb 14, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote: > > Well that's something to consider. I had hoped when I subscribed to > > this list to ask this question that I'd find people, possibly SA > > developers on it, who had benchmarked the

Re: Two servers, one database. A question

On Feb 14, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote: On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 15:04 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: I would bet on Bayes/userpref queries being more efficient than the spamc/spamd traffic. I like that you are asking the question. But I hate to guess at which is better though. The

Re: Two servers, one database. A question

On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 15:04 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: > > I would bet on Bayes/userpref queries being more efficient than > the > > spamc/spamd traffic. > > I like that you are asking the question. But I hate to guess at which > is better though. The weakest benchmark data point is better than

Re: Two servers, one database. A question

Kris Deugau wrote: > John Hardin wrote: >> The question is which is better, sending the message body (spamc <-> >> spamd traffic) or database queries (spamd <-> mysql traffic) over the >> expensive link? > > I would bet on Bayes/userpref queries being more efficient than the > spamc/spamd tra

Re: Last-5-percent tuning

Hi, > Do you use any MTA-level DNSBLs? No. If you have ample of ressources you can do this. If you are getting tenthousands of mails you can't (or won't). We reject about 90% of the spam at MTA. That's mostly Bot spam. Why should we burn good ressources for that stuff? Interestingly, that al

Re: Spam or Not Spam :)

On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 19:24 -0800, an anonymous Nabble user wrote: > I have some mails that I know they are spam but spamassassin gives secores > below 5.0(generally zero) for some of them. I updated the rules,changed the > score threshold but spamassassin still sees them as normal emails. Am I > m

Re: URI with spaces are not recognized

Wolfgang Zeikat a écrit : > I think the discussion is getting carried in a direction where we are > missing a point: spam detection. > exactly. otherwise, there's no point to waste resources running SA. after all, nobody would die for visiting a porn/casino/pharma/... site ;-p and there's also

Re: URI with spaces are not recognized

Hi John! John Hardin wrote: > On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Benny Pedersen wrote: > >> On Fri, February 13, 2009 18:12, John Hardin wrote: >>> If a URI rule works, what's wrong with a body rule? >> >> nothing wroung making bad rules either, point is that if bad rules >> is needed one have also bad behavin