On Thursday 17 August 2006 10:59, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote with regard to - 
Re: Missing Checks :
> Scott Ryan wrote:
> > On Thursday 17 August 2006 09:40, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote with regard to
> > -
> >
> > Re: Missing Checks :
> >> Scott Ryan wrote:
> >>> What was be the difference in configs between two servers if when
> >>> scanning the same message 1 marks it as not spam and only does the
> >>> following checks: dbg: check: tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_03_06,HTML_MESSAGE
> >>>
> >>> Yet the other machine does these checks and marks as spam:
> >>> dbg: check:
> >>> tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_03_06,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,TVD_FW_G
> >>>RA PHIC_ID3
> >>
> >> RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET: enable network checks on the first server
> >
> > Network checks were already enabled.
> >
> >> TVD_FW_GRAPHIC_ID3: use sa-update on the first server
> >
> > Thanks, this check was now done along with the RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET
> > check. [17166] dbg: check:
> > tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_03_06,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET
> >
> > And was subsequently trapped.
>
> RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET isn't a rule new to the set available via
> sa-update, so your previous run either suffered from a DNS timeout or
> intermittent failure.
>
> Daryl

Many thanks, is there any way of sa-learn indication what new checks are now 
availlable? Or is that just a bad idea?

-- 
Regards,

Scott Ryan
ISP Systems Development & Integration Specialist
Telkom Internet
-------------------------------------
Good judgement comes with experience. 
Unfortunately, the experience
usually comes from bad judgement.
-------------------------------------

Reply via email to