On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 08:01:12AM -0500, Skip Montanaro wrote: > > SM> Aside from longer execution time, what's the downside of disabling > SM> network checks in the mass-check script? > > Craig> Well, speed, clogging your pipe, speed, flooding the servers, > Craig> speed, and last but not least, speed. Doing 400,000 RBL lookups > Craig> (to each RBL service), hundreds of thousands of DNS MX lookups, > Craig> 400,000 razor lookups, 400,000 DCC lookups, etc, etc is nasty. > > Yes, but isn't this distributed over time and space? If I run mass-check on > my small corpus of 2,000 or so messages then send you the output that's the > only time all those lookups need to be run, correct? In fact, if people are > running these checks anyway in the normal course of doing their SA business, > couldn't the results be tossed into a header in a mass-check-compatible way > that a procmail rule (or something similar) could automatically extract? >
Not easily. My local rules aren't equal to yours. My disabled test don't mean a message doesn't match. -- Duncan Findlay _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
