At 01:22 PM 3/29/2009, you wrote:
dude, shut up and mind your own business. (and i mean that in the most
constructive manner)
You come to a list asking for help, you make whatever you state your
own business.
But with your attitude you aren't going to get anymore help from me.
you dont kno
Evan Platt a écrit :
> At 08:19 AM 3/29/2009, you wrote:
>
>> Evan,
>>
>> naw, hourly is just fine.
>>
>> we update "sought ruleset" at the same time.
>>
>> i spose i could change it, yet spam is not a once a day thing.
>>
>> spam is all day every day, so hourly is the least i want to see things
>
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 13:05 -0700, RobertH wrote:
> > From: Karsten Bräckelmann
> > The real impact isn't the DNS query, but whenever an update
> > has been pushed. If everyone would check once an hour, the
> > full load would have to be shouldered in 60 minutes, as
> > opposed to evenly distri
>
> Checking once an hour is obscene.
>
>
Evan,
dude, shut up and mind your own business. (and i mean that in the most
constructive manner)
you dont know me, you do not admin this business, and we are not stupid and
have been doing this for longer than many on this list have been alive.
i
At 08:19 AM 3/29/2009, you wrote:
Evan,
naw, hourly is just fine.
we update "sought ruleset" at the same time.
i spose i could change it, yet spam is not a once a day thing.
spam is all day every day, so hourly is the least i want to see things
updated.
But you're not seeing things updated
> From: Karsten Bräckelmann
> Heh, true. And he could run sa-update even more frequently.
> After all, the DNS answer is cached for an hour... ;)
>
> The real impact isn't the DNS query, but whenever an update
> has been pushed. If everyone would check once an hour, the
> full load would hav
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 18:14 +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
> on the other hand, the sa-update architecture can cope with it just fine. ;)
Heh, true. And he could run sa-update even more frequently. After all,
the DNS answer is cached for an hour... ;)
The real impact isn't the DNS query, but whenever
on the other hand, the sa-update architecture can cope with it just fine. ;)
2009/3/29 Karsten Bräckelmann :
>> > Isn't that a tad overkill?
>
> It is. :)
>
>> > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RuleUpdates
>> >
>> > How often should I run sa-update?
>> >
>> > As often as you like. It typically
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 09:20 -0700, RobertH wrote:
> >
> > Indeed. Either Robert is running some really old SA version,
> > or updating is plain broken on his machine.
> >
> > Well, or he deliberately put those rules back in locally...
The latter -- according to the other sub-thread all these ru
>
> Indeed. Either Robert is running some really old SA version,
> or updating is plain broken on his machine.
>
> Well, or he deliberately put those rules back in locally...
i believe i have checked all the rules.
we run 3.2.5
most of the rules were addons.
here is
[r...@ac updates_spamas
>
> Nope, you don't. You got a problem with your custom rules.
>
>
> > here is what it is tripping on...
> >
> > 0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d
> > 1.2 HOST_EQ_STATIC HOST_EQ_STATIC
> > 0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DBHost is d-d-d-d
> > 1.3 HOST_EQ_CHARTER
On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 23:27 +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > when did you sa-update for last time? afaik FH_HOST_EQ_*
> > > rules were removed some time ago. Not that current rules
> > > don't have some issues...
> > >
> > > And, of course, you have some rules unknown to me and clean
> > Isn't that a tad overkill?
It is. :)
> > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RuleUpdates
> >
> > How often should I run sa-update?
> >
> > As often as you like. It typically depends on what time-frame
> > is comfortable for you, and how quickly channels are going to
> > be publishing upda
> From: Evan Platt
>
> Isn't that a tad overkill?
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RuleUpdates
>
> How often should I run sa-update?
>
> As often as you like. It typically depends on what time-frame
> is comfortable for you, and how quickly channels are going to
> be publishing upda
> From: LuKreme
>
> Why re you running SA over known list messages?
>
LuKreme,
u good question.
we do it cause i havent decided to want, develope & implement, and to use a
way to filter out things i dont want to run through SA on inbound SMTP port
25.
it is easier for me to know every
On 28-Mar-2009, at 17:52, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 17:28 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 28-Mar-2009, at 15:32, RobertH wrote:
i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
Why re you running SA over known list messages?
I'm a member of four lists that are not moderated and
On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 14:32 -0700, RobertH wrote:
> i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
> it is hosted on a charter static and has wierd reverse dns etc etc blah.
Nope, you don't. You got a problem with your custom rules.
> here is what it is tripping on...
>
> 0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D
On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 17:28 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 28-Mar-2009, at 15:32, RobertH wrote:
> > i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
>
> Why re you running SA over known list messages?
>
I'm a member of four lists that are not moderated and do not restrict
access to paid-up members o
On 28-Mar-2009, at 15:32, RobertH wrote:
i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
Why re you running SA over known list messages?
--
Suddenly the animals look shiny and new
> > when did you sa-update for last time? afaik FH_HOST_EQ_*
> > rules were removed some time ago. Not that current rules
> > don't have some issues...
> >
> >
> > And, of course, you have some rules unknown to me and clean
> > SA, are you sure those problems aren't caused by them?
On 28.03.0
At 03:14 PM 3/28/2009, you wrote:
Matus,
we SA update hourly.
Isn't that a tad overkill?
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RuleUpdates
How often should I run sa-update?
As often as you like. It typically depends on what time-frame is
comfortable for you, and how quickly channels are goi
>
> Received-SPF: pass (ac.abbacomm.net: SPF record at
> cabletv.org designates
> 24.196.65.34 as permitted sender)
>
> how about:
>
>whitelist_from_spf *...@cabletv.org
>
> --
> John Hardin KA7OHZ
i saw that, yet i dont want to use wildcards...
unless i have
>
> when did you sa-update for last time? afaik FH_HOST_EQ_*
> rules were removed some time ago. Not that current rules
> don't have some issues...
>
>
> And, of course, you have some rules unknown to me and clean
> SA, are you sure those problems aren't caused by them?
>
> --
> Matus UHLAR
On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 14:32 -0700, RobertH wrote:
> hello
>
> i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
>
> it is hosted on a charter static and has wierd reverse dns etc etc blah.
>
> so, almost always scores as spam
>
> here is what it is tripping on...
>
> 0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_
On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, RobertH wrote:
http://www.abbacomm.net/temp/salisthdr1.txt
can someone help me formulate a good rule to reduce scoring.
Given that:
Received-SPF: pass (ac.abbacomm.net: SPF record at cabletv.org designates
24.196.65.34 as permitted sender)
how about:
whitelist_from
On 28.03.09 14:32, RobertH wrote:
> i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
>
> it is hosted on a charter static and has wierd reverse dns etc etc blah.
>
> so, almost always scores as spam
>
> here is what it is tripping on...
>
> 0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-
RobertH wrote:
> hello
>
> i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
>
> it is hosted on a charter static and has wierd reverse dns etc etc blah.
>
> so, almost always scores as spam
>
> here is what it is tripping on...
>
> 0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d
> 1.2 H
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/28/2009 04:32 PM, RobertH wrote:
> hello
>
> i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
>
> it is hosted on a charter static and has wierd reverse dns etc etc blah.
>
> so, almost always scores as spam
>
> here is what it is trippin
hello
i have problems with the cabletv.org email list.
it is hosted on a charter static and has wierd reverse dns etc etc blah.
so, almost always scores as spam
here is what it is tripping on...
0.7 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d
1.2 HOST_EQ_STATIC HOST_EQ_STAT
29 matches
Mail list logo
