> SNIP < > >>I've done some small scale experiments using PerlCtrl (the thing that > >>allows you to make COM objects from in Perl) to plug into Outlook. Short > >>and curlies of it is that it works, and it keeps Perl in memory, so > >>there's no load-time issue. However I'm not entirely sure how you might > >>make it refresh the rules. > >> > >Wow sounds neat! I wish you luck OutLook is a b***h. Are > you/someone going > >to try and sell it? > > No chance. Client level stuff is a bitch to manage as a company (we'd > rather write a plugin for exchange - which may be just as easy, but I > haven't tried that (yet?)). It was purely for fun, and to see if I could > stem the tide of spam before we rolled out our anti-spam stuff. I'd say the real reason for not doing it is that I wouldn't want to support it! As for the Exchange Plugin that should be very doable. A bit fiddly finding the best APIs n' stuff but I have looked in to doing similar things along toalty different lines. The new Virus Scanning API might be of use. If you realy want to you could do it.
> >>And no, I can't give away the code - sorry :-( But I will say it's easy > >>enough to do, given sufficient tuits. > >> > >Well to tell you the truth although it sounds quite neat I don't > realy want > >it. I have an office full of staff and we have had alot of bad > luck with COM > >objects in OutLook. I realy HATE OutLook. In there was annother > Win32 mail > >client that could cope with the ammount of email I handle I would move to > >it. > > > > Pine. I switched to pine here at work, and the windows version is quite > nice. You have to get used to some of its idiosyncracies, but once you > do, it's a killer mail client. The only thing it lacks is a "mark all > read" feature, but you can do that in something like 4 key presses, so > it's not fatal (note that I'm testing out Mozilla's mail client at the > moment, and while it's not bad, it's a bit flaky and I hate the GUI-ness > of it). You certainly miss things like "prefer text/plain", and "zoom" > when you switch to something else. Hummmm... That takes me back a bit. Pine is cool but how do you read HTML mail? I don't often need to but it is sorta required. I've not looked at Mozilla's client but I used to play with Eudora. The problem I've had with everything except OutLook is that they don't scale well. Mail boxs get courrupted, folders take hours to open and a generally bad time is had by all. I'm the Postmaster/Hostmaster for a pantload of domains and I get spammed in to the ground (Not for long I hope!). Not to mention all the mails I get from customers, vendors and our monitoring systems. I leave my mail client runnig at night so that I don't have to wait for 50+ mails to download every morning. The Retroness of pine is sexy though... even if I don't realy use it I will have to play for old times sake.... > >I'm currently thinking about giving up on my Proxy server. The problem I > >currently can't get around it timeouts when SA is chewing on a BIG mail. > >OutLook times out before I've even finished reading the mail in. I can't > >think of any way of doing a "keep alive" in a pop session. > Unless I want to > >check message sizes somehow (Not easy) I'm fked. ANY BRIGHT > IDEAS GREATFULLY > >RECEIVED. Or if anyone knows of a good place to talk to Perlites about > >networking I would be greatfull for that too... I'm still quite > new to Perl > >and havn't found any good places to ask techy network questions. > Can't you just turn off the network tests? The network test are off. The problem is sometimes I haven't even finished reading in the mail from the server when OutLook times out. OutLook is expecting to get the mail as quickly as it got it's '+OK'. The Proxy has to buffer the entire message for processing, while it's buffereing it times out OutLook. The only workaround I can see is to check the message size on the server before the mail is downloaded, if it's too big then pipe it to OutLook without processing it. This means trapping RETR commands and silently sending LIST command to see if the mail is too big. It also means an overhaul of my multi line response handler. That plows my complexity level WAY up. Even if SA was not running in the Proxy this would be a problem. Not even one I had thought of I'm ashamed to say. That's why I'm considering just ditching it, besides if I can hook in to out mail server well then I wouldn't need it anyhow. It's a shame to waste good code that I've worked on so hard though. Still in two minds ;) Nick _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
