On Thu, 04 Apr 2002, Sean Rima wrote:
[... message rewritten to conform to RFC2822 quoting ...]
> On 03 Apr 2002, Craig Hughes uttered the following:
>> Tony, I've been holding off on DCC until I thought it was a robust
>> enough system to use. I'm still somewhat haunted by Razor's
>> hiccuppiness in days gone by. In your experience is DCC nicely
>> stable/functional now? I was very intrigued by the project when I
>> first heard about it around 6 months or so ago now.
>>
>> In your impression of using it, is it ready to have the mailboxes of
>> several million (potentially) SpamAssassin mailboxes hitting its
>> servers? How easy is it to call out to DCC, both for verification and
>> for submission of new signatures? I'm guessing when it's time to
>> implement this in SA I'll have to sign up on the mailing list and get
>> into some discussion with the folks working on it, but before I do
>> that, what are your thoughts?
>
> I downloaded and installed dccproc under Exim 4.02, it seems stable
> enough but from time to time I get the following in my syslog:
> Apr 4 07:43:17 tcob1 dccproc[23445]: no answer from dcc.rhyolite.com
> (195.74.212.70,6277) after 6534.07 ms
>
> I hazard a guess that the server is too busy to handle all calls but
> saying that in around 600+ emails I have only had this around 8 times
> since 3am (IST).
>
> I am toying with the idea of having a server as well to see if that
> helps, I tend to get a lot of spam that hits several accounts at once.
The system looks like it's very strongly tailored toward having a local
server running at each site using it, then having a connected network of
servers around the world talking to each other -- much the same way that
Usenet or the DNS operates.
One of the big reasons you might see timeouts, incidentally, is that the
query is a single UDP packet. This means that a transient network outage
or a brief busy spot between you and the server would drop the packet
and result in a timeout. This is, it seems, by design.
I don't think that it would be a good idea to configure SpamAssassin to
talk to the central server run by Rhyolite, though. That's probably more
load than they really want.
Implementing a DCC client system in Perl, grafting that into
SpamAssassin, then enabling it with a configuration parameter to the
SpamAssassin or spamd process would seem sensible, though.
Daniel
--
The young do not know enough to be prudent, and therefore they attempt
the impossible, and achieve it, generation after generation.
-- Pearl S. Buck
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
