Probably not, at least not in the next version. spamdyke's DNS system sends its queries simultaneously and accepts the first positive response it receives. The rest are discarded. In order to log them all, spamdyke would have to wait for all responses to come back, which would slow down the DNS system quite a bit (it would make spamdyke only as fast as the slowest RBL instead of the fastest).
If you're just wanting to evaluate the RBLs you're using, I think you could probably do that more effectively from a daily script that analyzes the mail log, requeries RBLs and generates statistics. -- Sam Clippinger Eric Shubert wrote: > I like having specific RBLs logged. I just installed spamdyke on a few > qmail-toasters yesterday (replacing rblsmtpd), and was going to as about > this. Michael beat me to it! ;) > > If simultaneous queries are being done, can all RBLs that match be logged? > Perhaps a comma separated list within parenthesis. This would make it > possible to gather stats on the effectiveness of the RBLs being used. > > Sam Clippinger wrote: >> Yes, this is certainly possible. Right now spamdyke identifies the RBL >> in its message to the remote server but not in the logs. Good idea! >> >> What would be a good way to log this information (preferably without >> breaking existing scripts)? I'm thinking as I type here, but spamdyke >> already follows the rejection reason with parenthesis (when the log >> level is high enough) to indicate which file/line matched for file-based >> filters... perhaps the same could be done for RBLs/RHSBLs. Something >> like this: >> DENIED_RBL_MATCH(rbl.example.com) >> >> As for reordering the RBLs to put the often-matched ones first, the next >> version of spamdyke will make that less necessary. By default, it will >> query all RBLs simultaneously, regardless of their order. (That >> behavior can be prevented with a new flag -- ordering would be important >> in that case.) >> >> -- Sam Clippinger >> >> Michael Colvin wrote: >>>> To find real numbers, you would have to consider how many >>>> connections are accepted, how many are rejected and for what >>>> reasons. Then look at the popularity of different spamdyke >>>> features and specifically the popularity of different DNS >>>> RBLs. Use all that to find out what percentage of rejected >>>> connections could avoid the DNS queries due to local tests. >>> Along those lines, is it possible, or can it be possible, to have spamdyke's >>> logs indicate which DNS RBL caused a message to be rejected? I'm assuming >>> that once a reason for rejection is found, IE, the IP is listed in a >>> particular RBL, further tests against other RBL's in the list are not >>> performed? Knowing, statistically, which ones have a higher rejection rate, >>> and queuing those first in the list of RBLS might save some time. >>> >>> Or course, multiple RBLS could reject the same message, and the one first in >>> line would have the higher percentage, but this would give us a way to move >>> them around and check the results... >>> >>> Just a thought from a newbie to spamdyke. >>> >>> BTW, I LOVE Spamdyke! What a difference it has made in my system's ability >>> to filter spam and save resources! It's a God send! >>> >>> Mike >>> > > _______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
