Re: tflags

2017-08-05 Thread Bill Cole
On 3 Aug 2017, at 11:21, John Hardin wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017, John Schmerold wrote: I don't understand the purpose of tflags. Where is this parameter explained? man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf That will USUALLY work on most Unix-like systems that have SA installed, but sometimes will not o

Re: tflags

2017-08-03 Thread David B Funk
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Kris Deugau wrote: Ian Zimmerman wrote: On 2017-08-03 10:38, sha...@shanew.net wrote: The most common ones that I make use of are "multiple" and "maxhits" in order to allow a rule to be scored for each time it hits, but to stop counting after some threshold. I also use th

Re: tflags

2017-08-03 Thread shanew
Apologies, I should have used the phrase "score set" rather than ruleset. The "score" section of Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf talks about it briefly, as does the this wiki page: https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/WritingRules On Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Ian Zimmerman wrote: On 2017-08-03 10:38, sha...@

Re: tflags

2017-08-03 Thread Kris Deugau
Ian Zimmerman wrote: On 2017-08-03 10:38, sha...@shanew.net wrote: The most common ones that I make use of are "multiple" and "maxhits" in order to allow a rule to be scored for each time it hits, but to stop counting after some threshold. I also use the "net" tflag so that RBL checks only run

Re: tflags

2017-08-03 Thread Ian Zimmerman
On 2017-08-03 10:38, sha...@shanew.net wrote: > The most common ones that I make use of are "multiple" and "maxhits" > in order to allow a rule to be scored for each time it hits, but to > stop counting after some threshold. I also use the "net" tflag so > that RBL checks only run when a net-base

Re: tflags

2017-08-03 Thread shanew
The Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf man page includes a section on tflags and their various functions, but generally speaking tflags allow you to alter the way in which a rule is processed. The most common ones that I make use of are "multiple" and "maxhits" in order to allow a rule to be scored for eac

Re: tflags

2017-08-03 Thread John Hardin
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017, John Schmerold wrote: I don't understand the purpose of tflags. Where is this parameter explained? man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf Basically it allows setting some per-rule metadata that affects how the rule behaves. -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.imp

Re: tflags multiple and header exists:

2015-09-29 Thread John Hardin
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Philip Prindeville wrote: On Sep 29, 2015, at 10:44 AM, John Hardin wrote: On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Philip Prindeville wrote: Can you use something like: header __L_X_NO_RELAY exists:X-No-Relay Are you seeing empty X-No-Relay headers? How about: No, not empty.

Re: tflags multiple and header exists:

2015-09-29 Thread Philip Prindeville
On Sep 29, 2015, at 10:44 AM, John Hardin wrote: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Philip Prindeville wrote: > >> Can you use something like: >> >> header __L_X_NO_RELAYexists:X-No-Relay > > Are you seeing empty X-No-Relay headers? How about: No, not empty. Typically they say: X-No-Re

Re: tflags multiple and header exists:

2015-09-29 Thread John Hardin
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Philip Prindeville wrote: Can you use something like: header __L_X_NO_RELAY exists:X-No-Relay tflags __L_X_NO_RELAY multiple See also DUP_SUSP_HDR, which is in my sandbox but isn't performing well enough against the corpora to get published: http://

Re: tflags multiple and header exists:

2015-09-29 Thread John Hardin
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, John Hardin wrote: On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Philip Prindeville wrote: Can you use something like: header __L_X_NO_RELAY exists:X-No-Relay Are you seeing empty X-No-Relay headers? How about: header__HAS_NO_RELAYX-No-Relay =~ /./ Oops. If yo

Re: tflags multiple and header exists:

2015-09-29 Thread John Hardin
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Philip Prindeville wrote: Can you use something like: header __L_X_NO_RELAY exists:X-No-Relay Are you seeing empty X-No-Relay headers? How about: header__HAS_NO_RELAYX-No-Relay =~ /./ ...which is in my sandbox, but just for eval, it's not

Re: tflags multiple and header exists:

2015-09-29 Thread Philip Prindeville
On Sep 29, 2015, at 10:09 AM, Philip Prindeville wrote: > Can you use something like: > > header __L_X_NO_RELAY exists:X-No-Relay > tflags __L_X_NO_RELAY multiple Actually, that should probably be bounded to something like: tflags __L_X_NO_RELAY multiple maxhits=10

Re: tflags userconf

2010-02-26 Thread Charles Gregory
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010, RW wrote: I'm guessing it's also used to exclude rules from score optimization. There is a comment in 25_spf.cf: # these are "userconf" so that scores are set by hand tflags SPF_PASS nice userconf net tflags SPF_HELO_PASSnice userconf net Ah. I d

Re: tflags userconf

2010-02-26 Thread RW
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:20:06 -0500 (EST) Charles Gregory wrote: > I happened to notice that 'tflags userconf' was specified for a few > tests that, as far as I could tell have on user configurable > parameters. > > Example (3.2.5): > > 25_spf.cf:tflags SPF_PASS nice userc

Re: tflags multiple with mimeheader rules

2008-05-21 Thread Jeremy Fairbrass
"Jeremy Fairbrass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi all, Can the "tflags multiple" setting be used with mimeheader rules? Or only with header, body, rawbody, uri, and full tests? Also, where can I find some further info on how "tflags multiple" should be used - per