Byung-Hee HWANG wrote:
Matt, i didn't tell you. why did you reply for me? i was rather agreeing
with you on the spf's mention.
okay anyway you shoud make him(K Anand) do the spf patching with qmail.
Ok guys... I think I will have to patch Qmail with the patch suggested
abov
Matt Kettler wrote:
K Anand wrote:
I have whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED] in my conf.
As per the docs, they say that whitelist_from will act on
Envelope-Sender
Resent-Sender
X-Envelope-From
From
"In addition, the ``envelope sender'' data, taken from th
I have whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED] in my conf.
As per the docs, they say that whitelist_from will act on
Envelope-Sender
Resent-Sender
X-Envelope-From
From
However, from the below mails, it can be seen that this is not the case
or I have a misconfiguration
K Anand wrote:
Byung-Hee HWANG wrote:
hi,
On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 11:43 +0530, K Anand wrote:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 13.11.07 15:52, K Anand wrote:
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
configure your smtp server to add DNS data to Received: line
Byung-Hee HWANG wrote:
hi,
On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 11:43 +0530, K Anand wrote:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 13.11.07 15:52, K Anand wrote:
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
configure your smtp server to add DNS data to Received: line.
*list_from_rcvd doesn&#
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 13.11.07 15:52, K Anand wrote:
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
configure your smtp server to add DNS data to Received: line.
*list_from_rcvd doesn't work without list
(although it could be worth adding IP or CIDR check in
Byung-Hee HWANG wrote:
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 14:58 +0530, K Anand wrote:
K Anand wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
As an alternative, you can use whitelist_from_spf or
whitelist_from_rcvd on the list's return-path. From there, you can
configure shortcircuiting to bypass the rest of S
K Anand wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
As an alternative, you can use whitelist_from_spf or
whitelist_from_rcvd on the list's return-path. From there, you can
configure shortcircuiting to bypass the rest of SA and bayes_ignore_from
to prevent learning.
Would this be OK
whitelist_from
Matt Kettler wrote:
As an alternative, you can use whitelist_from_spf or
whitelist_from_rcvd on the list's return-path. From there, you can
configure shortcircuiting to bypass the rest of SA and bayes_ignore_from
to prevent learning.
Would this be OK
whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matt Kettler wrote:
K Anand wrote:
Hi all,
I'm currently using SA 3.1.xDue to certain custom rules regarding
images and html messages, mails from SA list are getting tagged as
SPAM. What I want to do is to skip SA checks for mails from SA list.
DO I have to use trusted_networks
Hi all,
I'm currently using SA 3.1.xDue to certain custom rules regarding
images and html messages, mails from SA list are getting tagged as SPAM.
What I want to do is to skip SA checks for mails from SA list.
DO I have to use trusted_networks ? or is there some other way?
Thanx
Anand
- Original Message -
From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Also, with that much mail coming in at the same time, there could be
contention for bayes locks. You might try adding
"bayes_learn_to_journal 1" to your local.cf, and see if that helps. This
will cause learning to be done
- Original Message -
From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
K Anand wrote:
Hi all,
I am running SA 3.1.1.
Warning: if you use the -v and -P options to spamd, your version is
vulnerable to a remote code exploit. This is not a typical setup, but
you shoul
Hi all,
I am running SA 3.1.1. I have seen that sometimes spamd processes using
up a lot of CPU. The cpu load goes up very high to ~ 10. I have checked that
RAM is not the problem since free shows that memory is still free. I have 1
GB RAM. Another thing is that my AWL file is around 85 MB.
14 matches
Mail list logo
