Hi John: >> What is the logic of the second part anyways, to add weight for test4 and test5 IF test1 and test2 failed? << If you have several blacklists of the same family (e.g., multiple open-relay filters, or multiple open-proxy filters) I like to group them together. I give a big weight to the entire group (the filter itself) and then may add an increment for blacklists with few false positives (each "contains" clause). Simiarly with Sniffer or invURIBL. There is some overlap between those two, and there is a potential overlap between Sniffer-IP and blacklists of "recent spam sources" (e.g., SpamCop, MXRate-Block). I have a filter that processes my various Sniffer types and invURIBL returns. At some point, I'd like to stop and first look if certain other Blacklist Tests had fired. If so, I'm done. If not, I want to add a little extra for Sniffer-IP.
Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax: +1 201 934-9206 _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John T (Lists) Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 02:41 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Filter 'END' statement in 4.3.14 flushes WEIGHT? Any filter that I do not have as active is moved to \declude\filters\notused from \declude\filtes so that my filters folder only contains filters that I am currently using. In your example, you are putting the IF statement after the THEN statement. I am not a programmer, but IF (the test of what you want to be quantified) always comes before THEN (the result you want to occur depending upon whether the test of the quantification failed or passed, meaning did it meat the criteria which is the defined IF statement), so the first part of your example does not make any sense. You only want weight added if test3 failed, so you have to quantify that FIRST and then say what occurs by adding weight. So, you have to have to filters since both sections rely upon testing IF test3 has failed or not. What is the logic of the second part anyways, to add weight for test4 and test5 IF test1 and test2 failed? John T eServices For You "Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1802-1882) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 10:48 AM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Filter 'END' statement in 4.3.14 flushes WEIGHT? >> Why the requirement of single filter? << Clarity? It's easier for me to follow a logic, if it's enclosed in a SINGLE source document (= filter). If the logical is spread over multiple source documents, I have to first scour the Global.CFG to see which filters are active, then inspect each one to see if by chance any one of them might have any effect. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax: +1 201 934-9206 _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John T (Lists) Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 12:57 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Filter 'END' statement in 4.3.14 flushes WEIGHT? Why the requirement of single filter? I have different combo filters created like this: ComboFilterA REM If testa and testb fail, and if testc or testd fail, add 10 ENDONFIRSTHIT TESTSFAILED END NOTCONTAINS testa TESTSFAILED END NOTCONTAINS testb TESTSFAILED 10 CONTAINS testc TESTSFAILED 10 CONTAINS testd ComboFilterB REM If testc and testd fail, and if teste or testf fail, add 20 ENDONFIRSTHIT TESTSFAILED END NOTCONTAINS testc TESTSFAILED END NOTCONTAINS testd TESTSFAILED 10 CONTAINS teste TESTSFAILED 10 CONTAINS testf IMHO, that is a much cleaner and neater way to do it. You could also use MAXWEIGHT instead of ENDONFIRSTHIT and then assign different weights to different test. John T eServices For You "Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1802-1882) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 9:29 AM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Filter 'END' statement in 4.3.14 flushes WEIGHT? Hi John, >> Was never changed. << Please read the URL I posted: http://www.mail-archive.com/declude.junkmail@declude.com/msg14009.html As you can tell, ORIGINALLY it did return the weight. He was thinking of it even FAILING the test (if there was a weight). >> What you should have been using is MAXWEIGHT at the top, or STOPATFIRSTHIT. << Kindly, please read the sample I had posted (bottom of this message). Your reply doesn't address the issue of trying to make some sections of a test conditional. Example, the goal is to return either 1 or 2 or 3 if test1 or test2 occur with test3 - and to only add test4 and test5, if test3 is not true. SKIPIFWEIGHT 20 MAXWEIGHT 3 TESTSFAILED 1 CONTAINS test1 TESTSFAILED 1 CONTAINS test2 TESTSFAILED END CONTAINS test3 TESTSFAILED 1 CONTAINS test4 TESTSFAILED 1 CONTAINS test5 etc etc Please demonstrate how MAXWEIGHT or STOPATFIRSTHIT would do this in a single filter? Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax: +1 201 934-9206 --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
