e to be lonely, then : -
http://www.kogko.com/nothanks/nothanks.php [...]
Content analysis details: (7.0 points, 7.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
7.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
[score: 1.]
S
e to be lonely, then : -
http://www.kogko.com/nothanks/nothanks.php [...]
Content analysis details: (7.0 points, 7.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
7.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
[score: 1.]
S
e to be lonely, then : -
http://www.kogko.com/nothanks/nothanks.php [...]
Content analysis details: (7.0 points, 7.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
7.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
[score: 1.]
S
e to be lonely, then : -
http://www.kogko.com/nothanks/nothanks.php [...]
Content analysis details: (7.0 points, 7.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- ------
7.0 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
[score: 1.]
So why do they work on one machine and not the other? Both machines are SA
3.0.0. and are virtually identical in setup.
>>> Jeff Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/13/05 09:34AM >>>
On Friday, May 13, 2005, 8:19:57 AM, Scott Schaffer wrote:
> SA 3.0.0 on both machines
On
SA 3.0.0 on both machines
>>> Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/13/05 08:06am >>>
At 06:14 PM 5/12/2005, Scott Schaffer wrote:
>I am migrating spamassassin from my perimeter firewall to another server
>to lighten the load on the firewall. I have installed SA3.0
a timing issue, perhaps? If so, where
do I increase the time for dnsbl look ups. What else could it be?
Thanks for any help anyone can give me.
Scott Schaffer
Machine behind the firewall results
