> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas > <uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas > >> <uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, John Hardin <jhar...@impsec.org> wrote: > >> >> > How fast are non-SA DNS queries on that box? If they take ten seconds > >> >> > to > >> >> > return an answer, SA is not the culprit. > >> > > >> > On 01.04.09 17:53, alexus wrote: > >> >> without dns they are 0.1 - 1.5s, with DNS they are ~7s > >> > > >> > by "non-SA DNS" he did not mean SA without DNS, but DNS without SA... > >> > just > >> > FYI. > > > > On 08.04.09 10:21, alexus wrote: > >> what I meant is SA without this: > >> > >> v320.pre:loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DNSEval > > > > what HE (Josh Hardin) meant, is: > > > > dig www.microsoft.com. > > dig 66.36.168.195.zen.spamhaus.org > > dig mx surbl.org > > > > and look at the "Query time" result.
On 08.04.09 11:40, alexus wrote: > r...@mx1 ~ 503$ time dig www.microsoft.com. > ;; Query time: 0 msec > r...@mx1 ~ 504$ time dig 66.36.168.195.zen.spamhaus.org > ;; Query time: 288 msec > r...@mx1 ~ 505$ time dig mx surbl.org > ;; Query time: 80 msec seems good. But I think that your problem has been solved or am I wrong? At least you have learned what means "dns without spamassassin" :-)-- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity...
