Re: test=none

2007-05-16 Thread Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Martin Hochreiter wrote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea schrieb: --- trusted_networks 80.123.XXX.XXX trusted_networks 80.122.XXX.XXX internal_networks 192.168.1.0/24 internal_networks 192.168.2.0/24 internal_networks 127.0.0.1 --- I am using the SuSE rpm spa

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Martin Hochreiter
Daryl C. W. O'Shea schrieb: > > --- > trusted_networks 80.123.XXX.XXX > trusted_networks 80.122.XXX.XXX > internal_networks 192.168.1.0/24 > internal_networks 192.168.2.0/24 > internal_networks 127.0.0.1 > --- I am usi

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Matt Kettler wrote: Matt Kettler wrote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: I get now hints from the logfiles concerning a timeout, my trusted/internal networks in local.cf are set as follwing --- trusted_networks 80.123.XXX.XXX trusted_networks 80.122.XXX.XXX internal_networks

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Matt Kettler
Matt Kettler wrote: > Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: > >>> I get now hints from the logfiles concerning a timeout, >>> my trusted/internal networks in local.cf are set as follwing >>> --- >>> trusted_networks 80.123.XXX.XXX >>> trusted_networks 80.122.XXX.XXX >>> internal_netw

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Matt Kettler
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: >>> >> I get now hints from the logfiles concerning a timeout, >> my trusted/internal networks in local.cf are set as follwing >> --- >> trusted_networks 80.123.XXX.XXX >> trusted_networks 80.122.XXX.XXX >> internal_networks 192.168.1.0/24 >> intern

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Martin Hochreiter wrote: Some messages here get tests=none. The two conditions I've found here are 1) like Matt already mentioned, a timeout in communication using spamc, or 2) the message was received totally within our network (trusted/internal). Perhaps maybe you don't have the trusted/intern

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Martin Hochreiter
> > Some messages here get tests=none. The two conditions I've found here > are 1) like Matt already mentioned, a timeout in communication using > spamc, or 2) the message was received totally within our network > (trusted/internal). > > Perhaps maybe you don't have the trusted/internal networks s

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Duane Hill
On Tue, 15 May 2007, Mark Martinec wrote: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=1.7 tests=[none] What does "tests=[none]" mean? Matt Kettler wrote: That's generated by amavis, not spamassassin. My guess, based on my limited knowledge of amavis, is that message means one of the following: Ama

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Martin Hochreiter
>{conf}->{scores}->{$test}; > } > } > return $line ? $line : 'none'; > }, > > It seems that really no rules matched. > > Mark > > Hi! I updated my rules to the latest ones - maybe I get now less of these "test=[none]" (Actually 2-3 mails out of 60 spammails in one account are affected) lg Martin

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Mark Martinec
> > No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=1.7 tests=[none] > > What does "tests=[none]" mean? Matt Kettler wrote: > That's generated by amavis, not spamassassin. > My guess, based on my limited knowledge of amavis, is that message means > one of the following: > Amavis did run the message through

Re: test=none

2007-05-15 Thread Matt Kettler
Martin Hochreiter wrote: > Hi! > > I am using spamassassin with amavis. > > I sometimes get mails (Spam Mails) - not tagged with ***SPAM*** > but tagged with the following header: > > No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=1.7 tests=[none] > > What does "tests=[none]" mean? > That's generated b

test=none

2007-05-14 Thread Martin Hochreiter
Hi! I am using spamassassin with amavis. I sometimes get mails (Spam Mails) - not tagged with ***SPAM*** but tagged with the following header: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=1.7 tests=[none] What does "tests=[none]" mean? lg Martin