On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 6:02:07 PM, Jon Dossey wrote:
>> On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 5:01:32 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 2:43:48 PM, Jon Dossey wrote:
>>
>> >> As per Matthew Romanek's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) recommendations, I
>> >> re-pointed my resolver to
> On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 5:01:32 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 2:43:48 PM, Jon Dossey wrote:
>
> >> As per Matthew Romanek's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) recommendations, I
> >> re-pointed my resolver to a different nameserver (from resolving
> >> locally), and can succ
On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 5:01:32 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 2:43:48 PM, Jon Dossey wrote:
>> As per Matthew Romanek's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) recommendations, I
>> re-pointed my resolver to a different nameserver (from resolving
>> locally), and can successfully scan
On Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 2:43:48 PM, Jon Dossey wrote:
> As per Matthew Romanek's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) recommendations, I
> re-pointed my resolver to a different nameserver (from resolving
> locally), and can successfully scan a message in a little under 2.5
> seconds (2.3 - 2.4 seconds).
Does your local server also do reverse lookups?
Jon Dossey wrote:
As per Matthew Romanek's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) recommendations, I
re-pointed my resolver to a different nameserver (from resolving
locally), and can successfully scan a message in a little under 2.5
seconds (2.3 - 2.4 seconds).
I al
As per Matthew Romanek's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) recommendations, I
re-pointed my resolver to a different nameserver (from resolving
locally), and can successfully scan a message in a little under 2.5
seconds (2.3 - 2.4 seconds).
I already upgraded to perl 5.8.5 and Net::DNS 0.48, which didn't reso
