RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
Title: Message You can setup port 587 now. The problem is that it can not be forced toauth only. So you should ask them to add the auth only feature to the alternat port. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:44 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Matt, SMTP Auth on port 587 is exactly why I called them last week. I recommend that everyone email [EMAIL PROTECTED] requesting support of submission port 587 in version 3.0 of smartermail. The only way its going to happen is if they perceive a huge demand for it. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MattSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:56 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 My own initial experience with their technical support was also less than appealing, in fact I was a bit angry about how it was handled. The person really wasn't too interested in helping to allay my concerns, and when I suggested that it would be good to include the capabilities that I was looking for in a future release, the reaction was pretty much that the developers were busy with SmarterStats and would be for some time, and that there wasn't a good way to get my request to the developers and no way to find out whether or not it would be considered no matter what. I chalked this up to this being a small company with a person that handled such requests that didn't like doing support, and possibly developers that didn't care for listening to such things and had set up a wall to separate themselves from it. It's too bad because you can learn a lot from your customers and their real-world experiences that wouldn't otherwise become known to them. I sucked it up and stuck with migrating my hosted E-mail over to SmarterMail despite this bad experience. If IMail's Web interface wasn't so bad, I probably wouldn't have jumped though.FYI, my issue was with their alternative SMTP port support. While you can set port 587 to accept SMTP connections, you cannot restrict it to only SMTP AUTH. I tried multiple other ways to keep this server from accepting non-authenticated E-mail with a mixture of configurations and filtering, but there were shortcomings for everything that caused a workaround to be unrealistic. For instance, I tried blacklisting everything except for authenticated connections, but their blacklisting will whitelist E-mail from any local address, even when forged. I understand that Declude will support WHITELIST AUTH with SmarterMail 3.0, but I have heard nothing about them addressing SMTP AUTH-only on the alternative SMTP port. Hopefully they will fix that before it gets exploited on my server.MattEvans Martin wrote: I recently asked a question on one of the public forums regarding why theserver identified itself as the primary IP address assigned to the boxinstead of the IP of the domain sending the email and received the same kindof response. We may be reconsidering our choice of mail servers soon too ifthis kind of behavior keeps up.Evans MartinMartek.Net -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 12:15 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0I called smartertools last week to tell them that we needed "submissionport587" support in version 3 and that we also need the listserver to havetheability to put the subscribers email address in the footer so that we canidentify AOLers who report list email as spam.The guy on the phone was very rude and would not hardly let me explain tohim what we needed in the new version and why it is important.I ended up having to send them an email explaining our needs. But I wouldnot hold my breath if you think they are listening to their customersdesires or if there is a feature you are waiting on. I own smartermailandsmarterstats and after my experience speaking with smartertools I am notimpressed with the company. -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of IMail AdminSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 1:25 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0yes, but I've been waiting all year for SM 3.0, with no end in site.Ben- Original Message -From: "Markus Gufler" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSent: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:02 AMSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Nice to know!Now it's time to set up the new mailserver ;-)Markus -Original Message-From: [EMAIL
[Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting
Title: Message Hi all I am tryi,g to find why an email was whitelisted I suspect autowhitelist, but how can i confirm ? the logs shows this: 10/31/2005 07:23:52 QC64AD3B100E67716 Skipping4 E-mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; whitelisted [EMAIL PROTECTED] ].
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help
Title: Message I had some mail stuck in HOLD2 that I want to let go..I copied it and put it into the spool on Saturday and it is still there...it has the IP it came from in front of the ID of the emailhow do I makethe systemsend out this email... Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet"
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help
Hi Richard, You need to rename the files removing the ip address - so each fire begins with its respective 'Q' or 'D' and put those renamed files in the spool dir. -Nick Richard Farris wrote: Message I had some mail stuck in HOLD2 that I want to let go..I copied it and put it into the spool on Saturday and it is still there...it has the IP it came from in front of the ID of the emailhow do I makethe systemsend out this email... Richard Farris Ethixs Online 1.270.247. Office 1.800.548.3877 Tech Support "Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet"
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help
Is there and easy way to do that...besides one at a time.. Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet" - Original Message - From: Nick Hayer To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:45 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help Hi Richard,You need to rename the files removing the ip address - so each fire begins with its respective 'Q' or 'D' and put those renamed files in the spool dir.-NickRichard Farris wrote: I had some mail stuck in HOLD2 that I want to let go..I copied it and put it into the spool on Saturday and it is still there...it has the IP it came from in front of the ID of the emailhow do I makethe systemsend out this email... Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet"
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help
Yes, use a renamer application http://www.snapfiles.com/freeware/system/fwfilerename.html David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard FarrisSent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:57 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help Is there and easy way to do that...besides one at a time.. Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet" - Original Message - From: Nick Hayer To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:45 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help Hi Richard,You need to rename the files removing the ip address - so each fire begins with its respective 'Q' or 'D' and put those renamed files in the spool dir.-NickRichard Farris wrote: I had some mail stuck in HOLD2 that I want to let go..I copied it and put it into the spool on Saturday and it is still there...it has the IP it came from in front of the ID of the emailhow do I makethe systemsend out this email... Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet"
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help
I use http://www.fauland.com/ 'rename your files' program. -Nick Richard Farris wrote: Is there and easy way to do that...besides one at a time.. Richard Farris Ethixs Online 1.270.247. Office 1.800.548.3877 Tech Support "Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet" - Original Message - From: Nick Hayer To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:45 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help Hi Richard, You need to rename the files removing the ip address - so each fire begins with its respective 'Q' or 'D' and put those renamed files in the spool dir. -Nick Richard Farris wrote: I had some mail stuck in HOLD2 that I want to let go..I copied it and put it into the spool on Saturday and it is still there...it has the IP it came from in front of the ID of the emailhow do I makethe systemsend out this email... Richard Farris Ethixs Online 1.270.247. Office 1.800.548.3877 Tech Support "Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet"
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting
Title: Message I'm pretty confident that the "Skipping4 E-mail from " means an address book whitelist. - Original Message - From: Serge To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 3:35 AM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting Hi all I am tryi,g to find why an email was whitelisted I suspect autowhitelist, but how can i confirm ? the logs shows this: 10/31/2005 07:23:52 QC64AD3B100E67716 Skipping4 E-mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; whitelisted [EMAIL PROTECTED] ].
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
Title: Message Kevin, Most of us know that you can set up an alternate port. The problem is, as you recapped, that it needs be a true SMTP Submission Port as defined by the RFCs and that means SMTP Auth. Apparently what smartertools doesnt get is that true support of 587 is needed for putting antispam gateways in front of smartermail. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Bilbee Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:04 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 You can setup port 587 now. The problem is that it can not be forced toauth only. So you should ask them to add the auth only feature to the alternat port. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:44 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Matt, SMTP Auth on port 587 is exactly why I called them last week. I recommend that everyone email [EMAIL PROTECTED] requesting support of submission port 587 in version 3.0 of smartermail. The only way its going to happen is if they perceive a huge demand for it. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:56 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 My own initial experience with their technical support was also less than appealing, in fact I was a bit angry about how it was handled. The person really wasn't too interested in helping to allay my concerns, and when I suggested that it would be good to include the capabilities that I was looking for in a future release, the reaction was pretty much that the developers were busy with SmarterStats and would be for some time, and that there wasn't a good way to get my request to the developers and no way to find out whether or not it would be considered no matter what. I chalked this up to this being a small company with a person that handled such requests that didn't like doing support, and possibly developers that didn't care for listening to such things and had set up a wall to separate themselves from it. It's too bad because you can learn a lot from your customers and their real-world experiences that wouldn't otherwise become known to them. I sucked it up and stuck with migrating my hosted E-mail over to SmarterMail despite this bad experience. If IMail's Web interface wasn't so bad, I probably wouldn't have jumped though. FYI, my issue was with their alternative SMTP port support. While you can set port 587 to accept SMTP connections, you cannot restrict it to only SMTP AUTH. I tried multiple other ways to keep this server from accepting non-authenticated E-mail with a mixture of configurations and filtering, but there were shortcomings for everything that caused a workaround to be unrealistic. For instance, I tried blacklisting everything except for authenticated connections, but their blacklisting will whitelist E-mail from any local address, even when forged. I understand that Declude will support WHITELIST AUTH with SmarterMail 3.0, but I have heard nothing about them addressing SMTP AUTH-only on the alternative SMTP port. Hopefully they will fix that before it gets exploited on my server. Matt Evans Martin wrote: I recently asked a question on one of the public forums regarding why theserver identified itself as the primary IP address assigned to the boxinstead of the IP of the domain sending the email and received the same kindof response. We may be reconsidering our choice of mail servers soon too ifthis kind of behavior keeps up.Evans MartinMartek.Net -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 12:15 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0I called smartertools last week to tell them that we needed submissionport587 support in version 3 and that we also need the listserver to havetheability to put the subscribers email address in the footer so that we canidentify AOLers who report list email as spam.The guy on the phone was very rude and would not hardly let me explain tohim what we needed in the new version and why it is important.I ended up having to send them an email explaining our needs. But I wouldnot hold my breath if you think they are listening to their customersdesires or if there is a feature you are waiting on. I own smartermailandsmarterstats and after my experience speaking with smartertools I am notimpressed with the company. -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of IMail AdminSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 1:25 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re:
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help
Thanxs, that just save me hours of work... Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet" - Original Message - From: David Barker To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:58 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help Yes, use a renamer application http://www.snapfiles.com/freeware/system/fwfilerename.html David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard FarrisSent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:57 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help Is there and easy way to do that...besides one at a time.. Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet" - Original Message - From: Nick Hayer To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:45 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Hijack Help Hi Richard,You need to rename the files removing the ip address - so each fire begins with its respective 'Q' or 'D' and put those renamed files in the spool dir.-NickRichard Farris wrote: I had some mail stuck in HOLD2 that I want to let go..I copied it and put it into the spool on Saturday and it is still there...it has the IP it came from in front of the ID of the emailhow do I makethe systemsend out this email... Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet"
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting
You can double check by scanning the whitelist section in your global.cfg file and address books for the text string. Travis - Original Message - From: Serge [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:39 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting Messagethanks scott, that confirms my thoughts - Original Message - From: Scott Fisher To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:38 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting I'm pretty confident that the Skipping4 E-mail from means an address book whitelist. - Original Message - From: Serge To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 3:35 AM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting Hi all I am tryi,g to find why an email was whitelisted I suspect autowhitelist, but how can i confirm ? the logs shows this: 10/31/2005 07:23:52 QC64AD3B100E67716 Skipping4 E-mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; whitelisted [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]. --- 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.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting
Title: Message thanks scott, that confirms mythoughts - Original Message - From: Scott Fisher To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:38 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting I'm pretty confident that the "Skipping4 E-mail from " means an address book whitelist. - Original Message - From: Serge To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 3:35 AM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisting Hi all I am tryi,g to find why an email was whitelisted I suspect autowhitelist, but how can i confirm ? the logs shows this: 10/31/2005 07:23:52 QC64AD3B100E67716 Skipping4 E-mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; whitelisted [EMAIL PROTECTED] ].
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
Title: Message Yes but you were not clear in the post I was responding to. So I thought I would clarify. Your post did not ask for authentication, so if we call and ask base on that information then the SmarterMail developers will just state that you can already do that. So specifics are required here. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:24 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Kevin, Most of us know that you can set up an alternate port. The problem is, as you recapped, that it needs be a true SMTP Submission Port as defined by the RFCs and that means SMTP Auth. Apparently what smartertools doesnt get is that true support of 587 is needed for putting antispam gateways in front of smartermail. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin BilbeeSent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:04 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 You can setup port 587 now. The problem is that it can not be forced toauth only. So you should ask them to add the auth only feature to the alternat port. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:44 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Matt, SMTP Auth on port 587 is exactly why I called them last week. I recommend that everyone email [EMAIL PROTECTED] requesting support of submission port 587 in version 3.0 of smartermail. The only way its going to happen is if they perceive a huge demand for it. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MattSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:56 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 My own initial experience with their technical support was also less than appealing, in fact I was a bit angry about how it was handled. The person really wasn't too interested in helping to allay my concerns, and when I suggested that it would be good to include the capabilities that I was looking for in a future release, the reaction was pretty much that the developers were busy with SmarterStats and would be for some time, and that there wasn't a good way to get my request to the developers and no way to find out whether or not it would be considered no matter what. I chalked this up to this being a small company with a person that handled such requests that didn't like doing support, and possibly developers that didn't care for listening to such things and had set up a wall to separate themselves from it. It's too bad because you can learn a lot from your customers and their real-world experiences that wouldn't otherwise become known to them. I sucked it up and stuck with migrating my hosted E-mail over to SmarterMail despite this bad experience. If IMail's Web interface wasn't so bad, I probably wouldn't have jumped though.FYI, my issue was with their alternative SMTP port support. While you can set port 587 to accept SMTP connections, you cannot restrict it to only SMTP AUTH. I tried multiple other ways to keep this server from accepting non-authenticated E-mail with a mixture of configurations and filtering, but there were shortcomings for everything that caused a workaround to be unrealistic. For instance, I tried blacklisting everything except for authenticated connections, but their blacklisting will whitelist E-mail from any local address, even when forged. I understand that Declude will support WHITELIST AUTH with SmarterMail 3.0, but I have heard nothing about them addressing SMTP AUTH-only on the alternative SMTP port. Hopefully they will fix that before it gets exploited on my server.MattEvans Martin wrote: I recently asked a question on one of the public forums regarding why theserver identified itself as the primary IP address assigned to the boxinstead of the IP of the domain sending the email and received the same kindof response. We may be reconsidering our choice of mail servers soon too ifthis kind of behavior keeps up.Evans MartinMartek.Net -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 12:15 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0I called smartertools last week to tell them that we
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
Title: Message Kevin, I didnt post verbatim to this list what I sent to smartertools. I assumed this audience here already understood how port 587 should work, Smartertools was provided a technical explanation along with the justification of why this feature is necessary. Just a few minutes ago I received an email reply from them that they understood the need for SMTP Auth on port 587 and telling me that it may not be there until 3.1 I am responding to them with a reason why they will have a world of grief if its not in 3.0 which is coming out in December. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Bilbee Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:44 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Yes but you were not clear in the post I was responding to. So I thought I would clarify. Your post did not ask for authentication, so if we call and ask base on that information then the SmarterMail developers will just state that you can already do that. So specifics are required here. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:24 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Kevin, Most of us know that you can set up an alternate port. The problem is, as you recapped, that it needs be a true SMTP Submission Port as defined by the RFCs and that means SMTP Auth. Apparently what smartertools doesnt get is that true support of 587 is needed for putting antispam gateways in front of smartermail. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Bilbee Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:04 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 You can setup port 587 now. The problem is that it can not be forced toauth only. So you should ask them to add the auth only feature to the alternat port. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:44 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Matt, SMTP Auth on port 587 is exactly why I called them last week. I recommend that everyone email [EMAIL PROTECTED] requesting support of submission port 587 in version 3.0 of smartermail. The only way its going to happen is if they perceive a huge demand for it. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:56 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 My own initial experience with their technical support was also less than appealing, in fact I was a bit angry about how it was handled. The person really wasn't too interested in helping to allay my concerns, and when I suggested that it would be good to include the capabilities that I was looking for in a future release, the reaction was pretty much that the developers were busy with SmarterStats and would be for some time, and that there wasn't a good way to get my request to the developers and no way to find out whether or not it would be considered no matter what. I chalked this up to this being a small company with a person that handled such requests that didn't like doing support, and possibly developers that didn't care for listening to such things and had set up a wall to separate themselves from it. It's too bad because you can learn a lot from your customers and their real-world experiences that wouldn't otherwise become known to them. I sucked it up and stuck with migrating my hosted E-mail over to SmarterMail despite this bad experience. If IMail's Web interface wasn't so bad, I probably wouldn't have jumped though. FYI, my issue was with their alternative SMTP port support. While you can set port 587 to accept SMTP connections, you cannot restrict it to only SMTP AUTH. I tried multiple other ways to keep this server from accepting non-authenticated E-mail with a mixture of configurations and filtering, but there were shortcomings for everything that caused a workaround to be unrealistic. For instance, I tried blacklisting everything except for authenticated connections, but their blacklisting will whitelist E-mail from any local address, even when forged. I understand that Declude will support WHITELIST AUTH with SmarterMail 3.0, but I have heard nothing about them addressing SMTP AUTH-only on the alternative SMTP port. Hopefully they will fix that before it gets exploited on my server. Matt Evans Martin wrote: I recently asked a question on one of the public forums regarding why theserver identified itself as the primary IP address assigned to the boxinstead of the IP of the
[Declude.JunkMail] Declude 3.0.5.14 Posted
Declude 3.0.5.14 ADDED - WINSOCKCLEANUPON Located in Declude.cfg. Some customers had issues related to their network stack causing loss of functionality for basic network operations. The default for this directive is OFF FIX - Memory leaked fixed by forcing windows to close handles once complete (Note this only effected a handful of customers) David B www.declude.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.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
Title: Message There are all levels of userh on this list from the people that probably know more that IPSwitch about email standards and thoes that are extreamly new to email. So specifics IMO are required. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:58 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Kevin, I didnt post verbatim to this list what I sent to smartertools. I assumed this audience here already understood how port 587 should work, Smartertools was provided a technical explanation along with the justification of why this feature is necessary. Just a few minutes ago I received an email reply from them that they understood the need for SMTP Auth on port 587 and telling me that it may not be there until 3.1 I am responding to them with a reason why they will have a world of grief if its not in 3.0 which is coming out in December. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin BilbeeSent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:44 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Yes but you were not clear in the post I was responding to. So I thought I would clarify. Your post did not ask for authentication, so if we call and ask base on that information then the SmarterMail developers will just state that you can already do that. So specifics are required here. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:24 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Kevin, Most of us know that you can set up an alternate port. The problem is, as you recapped, that it needs be a true SMTP Submission Port as defined by the RFCs and that means SMTP Auth. Apparently what smartertools doesnt get is that true support of 587 is needed for putting antispam gateways in front of smartermail. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin BilbeeSent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:04 AMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 You can setup port 587 now. The problem is that it can not be forced toauth only. So you should ask them to add the auth only feature to the alternat port. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave BeckstromSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:44 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Matt, SMTP Auth on port 587 is exactly why I called them last week. I recommend that everyone email [EMAIL PROTECTED] requesting support of submission port 587 in version 3.0 of smartermail. The only way its going to happen is if they perceive a huge demand for it. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MattSent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:56 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 My own initial experience with their technical support was also less than appealing, in fact I was a bit angry about how it was handled. The person really wasn't too interested in helping to allay my concerns, and when I suggested that it would be good to include the capabilities that I was looking for in a future release, the reaction was pretty much that the developers were busy with SmarterStats and would be for some time, and that there wasn't a good way to get my request to the developers and no way to find out whether or not it would be considered no matter what. I chalked this up to this being a small company with a person that handled such requests that didn't like doing support, and possibly developers that didn't care for listening to such things and had set up a wall to separate themselves from it. It's too bad because you can learn a lot from your customers and their real-world experiences that wouldn't otherwise become known to them. I sucked it up and stuck with migrating my hosted E-mail over to SmarterMail despite this bad experience. If IMail's Web interface wasn't so bad, I probably wouldn't have jumped though.FYI, my
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
Title: Message You all will be glad to know that smartertools has now agreed that support for SMTP AUTH ONLY on port 587 will be in version 3.0 when it comes out in December. They said earlier today that it likely would not be included because they were so close to release that it might be too late. However, I showed them postings from their forums where people had requested this feature going all the way back to 2004. I also shared some comments from our Declude list discussion on the topic over the last two days. It must have been enough to convince them of the need because they wrote back now confirming that it will be in 3.0. They said the listserver enhancements are slated for later. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Bilbee Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 12:26 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 There are all levels of userh on this list from the people that probably know more that IPSwitch about email standards and thoes that are extreamly new to email. So specifics IMO are required. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:58 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Kevin, I didnt post verbatim to this list what I sent to smartertools. I assumed this audience here already understood how port 587 should work, Smartertools was provided a technical explanation along with the justification of why this feature is necessary. Just a few minutes ago I received an email reply from them that they understood the need for SMTP Auth on port 587 and telling me that it may not be there until 3.1 I am responding to them with a reason why they will have a world of grief if its not in 3.0 which is coming out in December. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Bilbee Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:44 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Yes but you were not clear in the post I was responding to. So I thought I would clarify. Your post did not ask for authentication, so if we call and ask base on that information then the SmarterMail developers will just state that you can already do that. So specifics are required here. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 7:24 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Kevin, Most of us know that you can set up an alternate port. The problem is, as you recapped, that it needs be a true SMTP Submission Port as defined by the RFCs and that means SMTP Auth. Apparently what smartertools doesnt get is that true support of 587 is needed for putting antispam gateways in front of smartermail. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Bilbee Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:04 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 You can setup port 587 now. The problem is that it can not be forced toauth only. So you should ask them to add the auth only feature to the alternat port. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:44 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Matt, SMTP Auth on port 587 is exactly why I called them last week. I recommend that everyone email [EMAIL PROTECTED] requesting support of submission port 587 in version 3.0 of smartermail. The only way its going to happen is if they perceive a huge demand for it. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:56 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 My own initial experience with their technical support was also less than appealing, in fact I was a bit angry about how it was handled. The person really wasn't too interested in helping to allay my concerns, and when I suggested that it would be good to include the capabilities that I was looking for in a future release, the reaction was pretty much that the developers were busy with SmarterStats and would be for some time, and that there wasn't a good way to get my request to the developers and no way to find out whether or not it would be considered no matter what. I chalked this up to this being a small company with a person that handled such requests that didn't like doing support, and possibly developers that didn't care for
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
Hi, Matt - I had a similar experience. That's why haven't migrated yet. They simply did not understand - and what's worse, did not*want*to understand - why a SmartHost gateway would need to receive a list of acceptable addresses from the main server for which it is the gateway. They seemed to have no conception of dictionary attacks, SMTP envelope-level rejection, etc. It seems everyone's experience with the port 587 issue has been the same. I'm still not impressed. -Dave Dohetry Skywaves, Inc - Original Message - From: Matt To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 8:56 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 My own initial experience with their technical support was also less than appealing, in fact I was a bit angry about how it was handled. The person really wasn't too interested in helping to allay my concerns, and when I suggested that it would be good to include the capabilities that I was looking for in a future release, the reaction was pretty much that the developers were busy with SmarterStats and would be for some time, and that there wasn't a good way to get my request to the developers and no way to find out whether or not it would be considered no matter what. I chalked this up to this being a small company with a person that handled such requests that didn't like doing support, and possibly developers that didn't care for listening to such things and had set up a wall to separate themselves from it. It's too bad because you can learn a lot from your customers and their real-world experiences that wouldn't otherwise become known to them. I sucked it up and stuck with migrating my hosted E-mail over to SmarterMail despite this bad experience. If IMail's Web interface wasn't so bad, I probably wouldn't have jumped though.FYI, my issue was with their alternative SMTP port support. While you can set port 587 to accept SMTP connections, you cannot restrict it to only SMTP AUTH. I tried multiple other ways to keep this server from accepting non-authenticated E-mail with a mixture of configurations and filtering, but there were shortcomings for everything that caused a workaround to be unrealistic. For instance, I tried blacklisting everything except for authenticated connections, but their blacklisting will whitelist E-mail from any local address, even when forged. I understand that Declude will support WHITELIST AUTH with SmarterMail 3.0, but I have heard nothing about them addressing SMTP AUTH-only on the alternative SMTP port. Hopefully they will fix that before it gets exploited on my server.MattEvans Martin wrote: I recently asked a question on one of the public forums regarding why the server identified itself as the primary IP address assigned to the box instead of the IP of the domain sending the email and received the same kind of response. We may be reconsidering our choice of mail servers soon too if this kind of behavior keeps up. Evans Martin Martek.Net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 12:15 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 I called smartertools last week to tell them that we needed "submission port 587" support in version 3 and that we also need the listserver to have the ability to put the subscribers email address in the footer so that we can identify AOLers who report list email as spam. The guy on the phone was very rude and would not hardly let me explain to him what we needed in the new version and why it is important. I ended up having to send them an email explaining our needs. But I would not hold my breath if you think they are listening to their customers desires or if there is a feature you are waiting on. I own smartermail and smarterstats and after my experience speaking with smartertools I am not impressed with the company. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of IMail Admin Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 1:25 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 yes, but I've been waiting all year for SM 3.0, with no end in site. Ben - Original Message - From: "Markus Gufler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:02 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 Nice to know! Now it's time to set up the new mailserver ;-) Markus -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Franco-Rocha [ Declude ] Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 3:32 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude
[Declude.JunkMail] T-Online Emails are tagged for Bad Routing
Hi, As reported twice before (e.g. most recently yesterday), there is a bug in the "BadRouting" test. The "Countries" test correctly reports "GERMANY-destination". But the BadRouting test fails. I had posted sample SMTP headers yesterday. T-Online is one of the world's large Internet providers, one of the largest in Europe.This is equivalent to flagging all AOL mail for their internal routing. Best RegardsAndy SchmidtPhone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
I'm really surprised. My experience with SmarterTools has been nothing short of stellar. I've had two separate instances over the last year or so where I've had problems that a tech has made it his personal business to work through with me. One was a nightmarish install of a gateway in front of SM (i.e. not really their fault) and another was a mysterious problem where the mail server suddenly started eating bandwidth for no reason (it wasn't sending or receiving anything, and a reinstall eventually fixed the problem) and they wound up walking me thru a safe reinstall. When I gratefully asked if they wanted my cc# as this was a for-pay support call I was told that only comes into play with users who abuse the privilege of tech support and call them over and over. A week or so ago I posted on their forum asking how to migrate a bunch of smartermail domains from one server and integrate them into another one thats already running. They wrote up and posted a special KB article for that circumstance. So it ain't all bad. -- --mattRobertson-- Janitor, MSB Web Systems mysecretbase.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.
[Declude.JunkMail] CBL:Blacklist
Hi all I have found out Friday that my server is listed in this att.net blacklist. Does anyone have any good advise as to why? I can't seem to even get them to reply to my emails. I can't find any phone contact info for them at all. Any help at all would be wonderful! I have checked many other blacklist and am not listed on any i can find??? If there is a good reason they have us in there list i need to get it fixed! Thanks! Steve blacklist.mail.ops.worldnet.att.net Server response to MAIL FROM: 550-69.213.48.110 blocked by blacklist.mail.ops.worldnet.att.net. 550 Blocked for abuse. See http://www.att.net/general-info/rblinquiry.html --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses] --- 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.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0
I guess it depends on who you get. I'm glad to hear that others have has better experiences with them. -Dave - Original Message - From: Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 3:58 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude with SmarterMail 3.0 I'm really surprised. My experience with SmarterTools has been nothing short of stellar. I've had two separate instances over the last year or so where I've had problems that a tech has made it his personal business to work through with me. One was a nightmarish install of a gateway in front of SM (i.e. not really their fault) and another was a mysterious problem where the mail server suddenly started eating bandwidth for no reason (it wasn't sending or receiving anything, and a reinstall eventually fixed the problem) and they wound up walking me thru a safe reinstall. When I gratefully asked if they wanted my cc# as this was a for-pay support call I was told that only comes into play with users who abuse the privilege of tech support and call them over and over. A week or so ago I posted on their forum asking how to migrate a bunch of smartermail domains from one server and integrate them into another one thats already running. They wrote up and posted a special KB article for that circumstance. So it ain't all bad. -- --mattRobertson-- Janitor, MSB Web Systems mysecretbase.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.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] CBL:Blacklist
steve, we had same problem last week, this was the reason: -- In the vast majority of cases (well over 99.99%), seeing an individual IP address use a variety of different names indicates that the machine is infected with a spam trojan or proxy. In those rare instances where it is a IPSwitch Imail, WorkGroupMail or Ensim mail sending software or certain NAT configurations (ie: BellSouth shared hosting) fronting multiple independent domains, we permanently remove it from the list. IPSwitch Imail and WorkGroupMail servers, for example, attempts to simulate being different mail servers, one for each customer domain. In doing so, it copies the domain name through as the HELO domain. On the other hand, when anti-spam software sees a mail server apparently not able to make up its mind as to WHO it is, they understandably get very suspicious. -- if your ip-address was or is listed and you are using Imail, than mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask to remove the entry from the list permanently. marc At 22:03 31.10.2005, you wrote: Hi all I have found out Friday that my server is listed in this att.net blacklist. Does anyone have any good advise as to why? I can't seem to even get them to reply to my emails. I can't find any phone contact info for them at all. Any help at all would be wonderful! I have checked many other blacklist and am not listed on any i can find??? If there is a good reason they have us in there list i need to get it fixed! Thanks! Steve blacklist.mail.ops.worldnet.att.net Server response to MAIL FROM: 550-69.213.48.110 blocked by blacklist.mail.ops.worldnet.att.net. 550 Blocked for abuse. See http://www.att.net/general-info/rblinquiry.html --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses] --- 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. [Scanned for viruses by Declude] [Scanned for viruses by Declude] --- 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.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] CBL:Blacklist
oops, sry steve, just read CBL and dont saw the blacklist link in your email... so may some help if any will have problems with cbl.abuseat.org marc Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:59:23 +0100 To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com From: marc [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] CBL:Blacklist steve, we had same problem last week, this was the reason: -- In the vast majority of cases (well over 99.99%), seeing an individual IP address use a variety of different names indicates that the machine is infected with a spam trojan or proxy. In those rare instances where it is a IPSwitch Imail, WorkGroupMail or Ensim mail sending software or certain NAT configurations (ie: BellSouth shared hosting) fronting multiple independent domains, we permanently remove it from the list. IPSwitch Imail and WorkGroupMail servers, for example, attempts to simulate being different mail servers, one for each customer domain. In doing so, it copies the domain name through as the HELO domain. On the other hand, when anti-spam software sees a mail server apparently not able to make up its mind as to WHO it is, they understandably get very suspicious. -- if your ip-address was or is listed and you are using Imail, than mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask to remove the entry from the list permanently. marc At 22:03 31.10.2005, you wrote: Hi all I have found out Friday that my server is listed in this att.net blacklist. Does anyone have any good advise as to why? I can't seem to even get them to reply to my emails. I can't find any phone contact info for them at all. Any help at all would be wonderful! I have checked many other blacklist and am not listed on any i can find??? If there is a good reason they have us in there list i need to get it fixed! Thanks! Steve blacklist.mail.ops.worldnet.att.net Server response to MAIL FROM: 550-69.213.48.110 blocked by blacklist.mail.ops.worldnet.att.net. 550 Blocked for abuse. See http://www.att.net/general-info/rblinquiry.html --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses] --- 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. [Scanned for viruses by Declude] [Scanned for viruses by Declude] --- 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.
[Declude.JunkMail] DNS timeouts
http://www.declude.com/Version/Manuals/JunkMail/JM_2.0.6.asp Can you specify more than one DNS server to queary? I am getting quite a few dns timeouts. We are going to setup a dedicated caching server for declude/imail to use. I would like to use two for performance reasons. It would be nice if one timesout to use the 2nd before giving up. Travis --- 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.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DNS timeouts
More so that just to deal with intermittent timeouts, having a single DNS server barf can result in significant spam leakage and having the option of a fail over would be very, very nice to have. Matt Travis Sullivan wrote: http://www.declude.com/Version/Manuals/JunkMail/JM_2.0.6.asp Can you specify more than one DNS server to queary? I am getting quite a few dns timeouts. We are going to setup a dedicated caching server for declude/imail to use. I would like to use two for performance reasons. It would be nice if one timesout to use the 2nd before giving up. Travis --- 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.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DNS timeouts
Travis, My understanding is that Declude only uses the first DNS server specified in IMAIL. This can be overridden in the global.cfg, but in this case Declude still only uses one DNS server. It seems your only real option for redundancy is some type of DNS cluster or other type of redundant configuration of that nature. Darrell --- Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail Queue Monitoring, Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. - Original Message - From: Travis Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 9:50 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] DNS timeouts http://www.declude.com/Version/Manuals/JunkMail/JM_2.0.6.asp Can you specify more than one DNS server to queary? I am getting quite a few dns timeouts. We are going to setup a dedicated caching server for declude/imail to use. I would like to use two for performance reasons. It would be nice if one timesout to use the 2nd before giving up. Travis --- 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.
