On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 01:03:02PM +0000, Sean Doherty wrote: >On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 12:50, George Georgalis wrote: >> >Do you mean -0.001? Why would you want to penalise mail >> >coming thru a trusted path? >> >> It really doesn't matter to me what the score is, I just want to disable >> the test. >> http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3406 >> >> My /etc/spamassassin is the reference I replicate out to my other >> systems, and systems of my clients, which may or may not be on nat and >> certainly are on different networks. >> >> The setup I use routes mail at the tcp level, it's basically impossible >> for a message to reach spam assassin if it's from a trusted network. >So why not set trusted_networks to 127.0.0.1. That way you can >be certain that the rule will never fire. You'll also get the >benefit of the DNS blocklists been checked for the addresses in >the Received headers - with your current setup, its possible >that some of these will be marked as trusted, and as such you'll >lose the benefit of the RBL check.
There is lots of reasons not to do something. What I'm not seeing is a reason why I can't stop trusted_networks from using cpu/dns. your idea sounds okay for some applications (and I'm changing from 192.168 to 127.0.0.1 as a matter of course), but I don't want every address in headers looked up. I don't want any of them looked up. I hope it's okay for me to be that way. I am concerned about the IP a message is coming from, but in my setup, that is dealt with before SA ever sees the message. // George -- George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
