At 12:35 PM 5/9/2004, you wrote:
Are there step-by-step upgrade instructions posted anywhere? Our
configuration is Windows 2000 server with Declude. I don't quite understand
what needs to be done to enable the Persistent Instance option.
Step-by-step instructions will depend on how you intend to
Pete, am I correct in assuming that the configuration file (snfrv2r3.cfg)
should also be renamed for your license ID, as well?
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Pete McNeil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 2:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Message
2:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
At 05:19 PM 5/9/2004, you wrote:
Pete, am I correct in assuming that the configuration file
(snfrv2r3.cfg) should also be renamed for your license ID, as well?
Bill
Yes, that is correct.
.cfg
At 05:28 PM 5/9/2004, you wrote:
Thanks Pete! One other question. I am now downloading my rulebase files as
.gz files (much faster downloads now). Are you prepared to receive our log
file uploads either zipped or gzipped?
I'm not ready to do that yet, but it does seem like a good idea. I'll
The persistent mode stopped working after installing new program.
Revert back to old one and it works???
Start xx.exe x persistent
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 4:59 AM
Subject: Re: [sniffer
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Frederick Samarelli
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 8:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
The persistent mode stopped working after installing new program.
Revert back to old one and it works???
Start
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
The persistent mode stopped working after installing new program.
Revert back to old one and it works???
Start xx.exe x persistent
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED
I am having problems getting it started from the command prompt.
- Original Message -
From: Landry William [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 10:30 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
It seems to be working fine
]
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 7:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
I am having problems getting it started from the command prompt.
- Original Message -
From: Landry William [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday
When I do it the window pop-up is blank
- Original Message -
From: Landry William [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 10:59 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
Fredrick, I stopped the Sniffer service and tested
Same here, but if you check your logs, I think you will find that it is
working.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Frederick Samarelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 8:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release
Is this by design
- Original Message -
From: Landry William [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 11:08 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
Same here, but if you check your logs, I think you will find
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
Is this by design
- Original Message -
From: Landry William [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 11:08 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official
At 08:09 PM 5/9/2004, you wrote:
The persistent mode stopped working after installing new program.
Revert back to old one and it works???
Start xx.exe x persistent
I've not tried running it that way - though it should work if you're
willing to remain logged in. Normally you would
At 10:06 PM 5/9/2004, you wrote:
Same problem here. (MDaemon ver. 7.01 - Latest)
I've replaced the old .exe with the new 2.3 and renamed it with my license.
Is there anything else?
Persistent now hangs when executed. Are we not supposed to see the
'polling' anymore?
Yes. Sorry for the
Yes.
At 11:10 PM 5/9/2004, you wrote:
Is this by design
- Original Message -
From: Landry William [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 11:08 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Message Sniffer Version 2-3 Official Release!
Same here, but if you check your logs, I
At 12:09 AM 5/10/2004, you wrote:
Thanks _M
Not to cause trouble, but I did get comfortable with the polling output. At
a glance, I could see heavy incoming traffic. But there's other ways for
monitoring that...
Just to be 100% clear: I've attached 2 files.
1) Old ver - Polling text output
2)
No initial problems here. Installed fine.
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
(un)subscription instructions go to
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html
to 1:
12:24:17 (78.89 KB/s) - `sniffer2.new.gz' saved [1983539/1983539]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 8:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
mod_gzip is now configured on our web
At 02:49 PM 5/4/2004, Vivek Khera wrote:
On May 4, 2004, at 3:42 PM, Pete McNeil wrote:
Every rulebase is potentially a different size composition, plus sizes
typically change with each update. I'm glad to hear all the positive
reports on this. :-)
Forgive me... What is the URL for the zipped
At 04:17 PM 5/4/2004, you wrote:
At 02:49 PM 5/4/2004, Vivek Khera wrote:
On May 4, 2004, at 3:42 PM, Pete McNeil wrote:
Every rulebase is potentially a different size composition, plus sizes
typically change with each update. I'm glad to hear all the positive
reports on this. :-)
Forgive me...
Tech Support
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
At 04:17 PM 5/4/2004, you wrote:
At 02:49 PM 5/4/2004, Vivek Khera wrote:
On May 4, 2004, at 3:42 PM, Pete McNeil wrote
of this
problem?
Eddie Arrants
Cape Lookout Internet Services
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:46 PM
To: Richard Farris; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
This may have been aswered
At 07:13 AM 5/1/2004, you wrote:
This can be done with wget, for example, but setting this up appears to be
technically complex - so I'm going to leave it at that for now. (Requires
the --header switch and piping the output through gzip)
It is not so complex:
In the wget command change
-O
Appears to work beautifully.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 12:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
At 07:13 AM 5/1/2004, you wrote:
This can be done with wget, for example
At 04:56 PM 4/20/04 -0400, Pete McNeil wrote:
Just to follow up in the same thread, the compilers were running, but the
update notifications were not going out. We missed it locally because our
local update notifications follow a different path and because the
compilers were running normally. I
Same here my last was Tue 4/20/2004 3:11 PM
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Kirk Mitchell
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 2:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Scheduled Updates
At 04:56 PM 4/20/04 -0400, Pete McNeil wrote
At 05:56 PM 4/21/2004, you wrote:
At 04:56 PM 4/20/04 -0400, Pete McNeil wrote:
Just to follow up in the same thread, the compilers were running, but the
update notifications were not going out. We missed it locally because our
local update notifications follow a different path and because the
Sorry ignore last just found our notification email service sent out when
sniffer is updated wasn't running (sorry)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of David Lewis-Waller
Sent: 20 April 2004 17:12
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 2:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Scheduled Updates
I show the latest compile time as 20040420.1644 GMT.
I'll check the logs to see if there has been trouble with your update email.
Then I will follow up
I also have not received any email notifications today.
Stephen
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of EI8HT LEGS Technical Support
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 3:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Scheduled Updates
I am
Same here, but I have updates scheduled every two hours anyway.
Glenn Z.
- Original Message -
From: Stephen S Zappardo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 2:40 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Scheduled Updates
I also have not received any email
I just checked my logs and my last update e-mail notification was Sunday
at 7:56PM.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 2:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Scheduled Updates
I can confirm we're not getting notification emails to trigger updates.
David
This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
(un)subscription instructions go to
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html
Same here... Last update was 5:59PM EST on 04/18/04
Patrick
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Lewis-Waller
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 3:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Scheduled Updates
I can confirm we're
was Sunday
at 7:56PM.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 2:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Scheduled Updates
I show the latest compile time as 20040420.1644 GMT.
I'll check
We are also not getting sniffer update email notifications.
--
Steven Z. Harris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus Detection Software
[mail.irpweb.net]]
This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
(un)subscription
Just wondering what might have happened as we are getting overwhelmed by
SPAM today and yesterday getting through.
There were a few bad matrix messages in the log file but the majority of
the entries are OK [99%].
I tried to download an updated file but wget cannot seem to gain access
to your
, April 13, 2004 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] log file growing
First, give it a test by launching it manually to make sure it's not broken.
If that works then set up a scheduled task to run the .cmd once a day (that's usually enough).
That should be it.
Thanks!
_M
At 05:57 PM 4/13/2004, you
We had some major BGP flapping with both Sprint and Savvis. Nobody has
gotten to the bottom of it yet and it settled down around 0200. No errors
or warnings since then.
_M
At 10:37 PM 4/13/2004, you wrote:
Pete.
I am seeing major download problems of the SNF file tonight.
Any problems with
At 10:01 AM 4/14/2004, you wrote:
Hi,
In the default logrotate.cmd script is a move
in stead of a ren command. Is there any special reason for that? As Ren
is an internal command and move an external command I would have expected
Ren to be used.
That's a good point - I guess I used move because
: donderdag 8 april 2004 21:11To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for
snfrv2r3
Preliminary tests show there's no I/O problem but I'll do some
additional benchmarking here and get back to you on
this.
Groet, (regards)
--
ing. Michiel Prins
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Michiel Prins
Sent: donderdag 8 april 2004 21:11
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for snfrv2r3
Preliminary tests show there's
no I/O problem but I'll do some additional benchmarking here and get back
to you
- Original Message -
From:
Pete McNeil
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 2:09
PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] log file
growing
Usually the log rotation is handled in a different .cmd.I
guess it could have been cobbled together but I don't recall doing
It is working, I tested it from the command line. What time of day do
you want it run?
- Original Message -
From:
Pete McNeil
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 7:06
PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] log file
growing
First, give it a test by launching
that does
that?
Thanks, andy
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] log file growing
H,
If we were triggering it - then that would have been our
update
notification message
All,
While no one has protested, it's possible that the beta invitation
might have looked like a commercial plug to some of you. We initially
thought of indicating otherwise outright, but decided that it that
might look as if _we_ had protested too much. grin
For the record, this
it has stopped working... It was being
initiated automatically by an email sent by you to the system in Imail.
Where do I look?
Thanks, andy
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 3:20 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] log file
]
On Behalf Of Kirk Mitchell
Sent: donderdag 8 april 2004 23:35
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for snfrv2r3
At 05:42 AM 4/8/04 -0400, Pete McNeil wrote:
http://www.keyconn.net/misc/sniffer.htm
I'll bet you are using b1 - this first 2-3beta does not implement
At 12:18 PM 4/9/2004, you wrote:
HI,
My log file used to write to a new file everyday, now it is writing to the
same file...
I didn't change anything, how do I fix it?
This is confusing. Message Sniffer has always written to a single log file
that does not change. External utilities could be
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete
McNeilSent: woensdag 7 april 2004 17:38To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for
snfrv2r3
Extraordinary...Compare with a snippet from our IMail/NT4 test
platform (severely underpowered)...snf2beta 20040407140913
D0b86122.SMD 30 90 Final 75148
At 05:42 AM 4/8/04 -0400, Pete McNeil wrote:
http://www.keyconn.net/misc/sniffer.htm
I'll bet you are using b1 - this first 2-3beta does not implement the
command interface.
Yes, I had b1 in use, trying b2 now.
--
Kirk Mitchell-General Manager[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Keystone Connect
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete
McNeilSent: woensdag 7 april 2004 11:21To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for
snfrv2r3
What does the sniffer log show during this time?_MAt
04:48 AM 4/7/2004, you wrote:
Pete,Despite
my suggestions
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for snfrv2r3
At 04:06 PM 4/7/2004, you wrote:
So,
making sure I'm following your analysis: I'm looking at my log file and
I'm seeing lines similar to
snf2beta 20040407020014
D60a4134.SMD
181 30 Match 101576 58 20 38
What is the best and proper way to setup Persistent mode on a windows 2000
computer and run as a service.
Fred
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 8:30 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for snfrv2r3
Sniffer is adaptive. You can turn the persistent instance on and off at
will. Simply stop the service - a reboot is not needed. If the persistent
instance is turned off then the remaining instances will organize
themselves in the usual way.
I don't have it running as a service, I started the
My findings are that persistent is offering great benefits, havnt tried an
excessively harsh test yet, but i'm about to do that.
Just ran sniffer in both persistent and non-persistent modes with over 1,000 mesages
in the overflow and MaxQueProc at 50. This pegs out my CPU between 90% 100%
At 09:11 PM 4/7/04 -0400, Pete McNeil wrote:
sniffer.exe stop - will stop the persistent server by sending it a message
file.
Run 'sniffer.exe stop' at the command line and your persistent instance
will exit cleanly on it's own. [ replace sniffer.exe with the name of your
executable of course
This worked great.
Thanks.
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 8:46 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for snfrv2r3
At 08:36 PM 4/7/2004, you wrote:
What is the best and proper way to setup Persistent
Tried the above and got an error message. Tried:
sniffer.exe xxauthenticationxx stop
and it paused a few seconds and returned to command prompt, so I'm guessing
that it stopped.
That doesn't sound quite right.
In the distribution there are some .CMD files that show examples of the
commands:
Since you're up, sorry to ask, where's the beta? Didn't save the e-mail.
Rob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 9:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Final beta (b2) for snfrv2r3
We've noticed that too just today...
Nick Marshall
Giacom World Networks Ltd
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Rateliff
Sent: 05 April 2004 16:41
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [sniffer] Microsoft Entourage Clients
I have
Didn't happen this time, nevermind!
Frederic TaraseviciusInternet Information Services, Inc.http://www.i-is.com/810-794-4400mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From:
Fred
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 1:42
PM
Subject: [sniffer] Test
:-)
At 04:31 PM 3/29/2004, you wrote:
Didn't happen this
time, nevermind!
Frederic Tarasevicius
Internet Information Services, Inc.
http://www.i-is.com/
810-794-4400
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Fred
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004
Online1.270.247.
Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support
- Original Message -
From:
Pete McNeil
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 1:41
PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Help
This seems like a rulebase thing.We spoke on the
phone.If the problem isn't solved by getting
places...thanks for all the help..
Richard Farris
Ethixs Online
1.270.247. Office
1.800.548.3877 Tech Support
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Help
This seems like a rulebase thing.
We spoke
At 01:57 AM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
I once noticed that transferring data through TCP/IP is NOT error-free, if
the connection is very slow. At least not if it is going through Microsoft's
software (Windows).
Me 2.
One possibility that has been suggested is that we could gzip these files.
That
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 2:17 AM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Spam storm?
At 02:50 AM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Pete McNeil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Normally our bandwidth is sufficient. We have considered mirror sites
also,
and we have plans
At 03:39 AM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Pete McNeil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Since we're both up at this insane hour. Would you mind making a test?
I've just shut down the Sprint line - so we're running through Savvis
exclusively. If I'm right about the connectivity
At 07:42 AM 3/26/04 -0500, Russ Uhte (Lists) wrote:
Pete,
Just wanted to interject a couple observations. I'm connected to the
Internet through a 15Mb frac ds/3 from ATT and a T1 from Sprint. I of
course of no way of telling which pipe our automated downloads are coming
from. However, I too
At 07:42 AM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
Pete,
Just wanted to interject a couple observations. I'm connected to the
Internet through a 15Mb frac ds/3 from ATT and a T1 from Sprint. I of
course of no way of telling which pipe our automated downloads are coming
from. However, I too have noticed
] Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 8:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Spam storm?
At 07:42 AM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
Pete,
Just wanted to interject a couple observations. I'm connected to the
Internet through a 15Mb frac ds/3 from ATT and a T1 from Sprint. I
At 09:10 AM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
On Mar 25, 2004, at 8:10 PM, Pete McNeil wrote:
ERROR_BAD_MATRIX is definitely a corrupted rulebase file. A manual
download should solve the problem.
Should not snf2check.exe detect this? If the sniffer can detect it, it
seems that the checker should too.
, Vice President
EI8HT LEGS Web Management Co., Inc.
http://www.getafreewebsite.com
877-483-3393
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kevin Stanford
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 10:22 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Spam storm?
I
being put into production.
Fred
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Error_Bad_Matrix
At 09:10 AM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
On Mar 25, 2004, at 8:10 PM, Pete McNeil wrote
It's starting to come together now.
Wget on windows + errors on the Sprint line since the move = corrupted
downloads for folks who end up routing through sprint along the way?
Could be.
We use Windows 2k, Wget and have our connection at our end from Sprint...
Sheldon
Sheldon Koehler,
: Thursday, March 25, 2004 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Help
MicroNeil Voice Line: 703-779-4909
_M
At 01:30 PM 3/25/2004, you wrote:
I got it.I am on to something so I might figure it outif I dont is there a number I can call..
Richard Farris
Ethixs Online
1.270.247. Office
At 02:26 PM 3/26/2004, you wrote:
I've been getting the error message below for the past two weeks. I get
it for both smtp32.exe and imail1.exe
Application popup: smtp32.exe - Application Error : The application
failed to initialize properly (0xc142). Click on OK to terminate the
application.
There was a bad rule yesterday. It was removed almost immediately but it
looks like you missed the update until 1000pm. It takes a while to compile
rulebase updates. Since you mention 4pm and 10pm I'm guessing you have your
updates scheduled. A better method would be to trigger updates based on
2004 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Possible Bad Rule?
We had a badly coded rule that matched yahoo.
The rule has been removed.
About 30 rulebases went out before it was caught.
These are being recompiled with the correction right now.
I will see if I can push yours to the top.
_M
At
: Sheldon Koehler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 3:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Spam storm?
Well it may not be a spam storm. Log file shows:
nsx4b3eh 20040324200108 De90392330028271a.SMD 421 0 ERROR_BAD_MATRIX 71 0 0
2 5
nsx4b3eh 20040324200117
I am having the same problem when I download the update and run snf2check
H.
- Original Message -
From: Landry William [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 2:57 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Error_Bad_Matrix
I run snf2check.exe against every .snf file
This has been a bad week here!
A big increase in total email volume, a huge increase in false positives as
well as a huge increase in spam getting past our filters.
Sheldon
Sheldon Koehler, Owner/Partnerhttp://www.tenforward.com
Ten Forward Communications 360-457-9023
, 2004 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Spam storm?
This helps narrow things down. Specifically we know that the rulebase files
are not corrupted on the server but during the download. That explains why
I haven't been able to recreate a problem in the lab.
I have a suspicion that wget may
I think the problem is in the file extension.
It should not be .com, but rather .cmd.
Hope this helps,
_M
At 12:32 PM 3/25/2004, you wrote:
Hi,
When I try to run the .com file, I get an error. I have attached the
error dialog box and a copy of the .com file (name altered to .co_) that
I am
: Matt
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Help
Have you tried a reboot? Checked your error logs? Made sure that DNS and all of your E-mail services are running?
Is there even a chance that you will be able to receive this message?
Matt
Richard
I've been looking at that. The problem seems to be related to downloads,
not generation. That is, every rulebase that I use locally has been clean
throughout this episode. Also, folks who manually download the rulebase
seem to be able to correct the problem. I'm not sure yet what is different
Error_Bad_Matrix entries in today's log.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Vivek Khera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 12:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Error_Bad_Matrix
On Mar 25, 2004, at 3:39 PM, Paul Lushinsky wrote:
I decided to look in my log files
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Spam storm?
Big uptick of new and broken spam.
Half way through the day and already at 445 new rules.
We may be getting it under control though... (fingers crossed).
_M
At 06:02 PM 3/24/2004, you wrote:
Am
were reported. I now have almost 3500
Error_Bad_Matrix entries in today's log.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Vivek Khera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 12:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Error_Bad_Matrix
On Mar 25, 2004, at 3:39 PM, Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 8:43 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Spam storm?
I see over a 1000 of these ERROR_BAD_MATRIX entries in my Sniffer log
file
today, as well. Is this due to the ruleset issue from earlier today?
Bill
-Original Message
, March 25, 2004 7:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Spam storm?
This helps narrow things down. Specifically we know that the rulebase files
are not corrupted on the server but during the download. That explains why
I haven't been able to recreate a problem in the lab.
I have a suspicion
will
try to watch the logs more closely and manually test the snf files that
begin to generate bad_matrix errors to see if their bad at that time.
-Original Message-
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 18:05:39 -0500
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Spam
At 06:51 PM 3/25/2004, you wrote:
Looks like a bandwidth issue to me, since even doing the download manually,
my connection stalled 5 times before I could complete a successful download.
And the download speeds were atrocious, many times in bytes/second rather
than even kb/second - and my
-Original Message-
From: Vivek Khera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 12:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Error_Bad_Matrix
On Mar 25, 2004, at 3:39 PM, Paul Lushinsky wrote:
I decided to look in my log files for the past several days because of
number
there will be no choice but to change the format in order
to prevent this possibility.
_M
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 7:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] Spam storm
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Peer-to-Peer, LLC
Sent: donderdag 18 maart 2004 15:15
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Call for beta testers... snfrv2r3b1
Groet,
RE: MDaemon:
I guess I'm confused on how to determine the Content Filter poll time.
Here's a (.txt snippet of my CF log file
At 08:08 PM 3/17/2004, you wrote:
What is the number after Polled waited:
That is the number of milliseconds the persistent server waited to poll the
working directory for more jobs. This number will increase each time no
jobs are found. When a job is found the persistent server will not wait
Ok, I think I did it. Only took a minute (thanks Bill). Here are some
more precise directions, but consider them to be "beta" directions
(please correct them if you find a problem):
1) Install the Windows 2000 Resource Kit, or download
and install the INSTSRV.exe and SRVANY.exe files in a
Pete,
Although inconclusive, some screen caps of Task Manager seems to show a
dramatic reduction in many of the peaks with the service turned on.
It's hard to tell the exact impact due to the virus scanners not always
being called, and SKIPIFWEIGHT settings disabling a mountain of custom
901 - 1000 of 1018 matches
Mail list logo
