Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread Nigel Frankcom
On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:10:53 -0400, Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags: [20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended that you configure trusted_networks manually However: # grep trusted

Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread mouss
Nigel Frankcom wrote: On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:10:53 -0400, Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags: [20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended that you configure trusted_networks manually However: #

Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread Sahil Tandon
Nigel Frankcom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:10:53 -0400, Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags: [20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended that you configure trusted_networks

Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread Daryl C. W. O'Shea
On 21/06/2008 1:10 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote: I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags: [20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended that you configure trusted_networks manually This is expected and intentional. Your local cf files are not used

Re: trusted_host breaks pretty much every form of whitelist

2008-06-21 Thread Matthias Leisi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jo Rhett schrieb: | Why not allow me to say I trust everything from this host no matter what? Why would you run the mails through SpamAssassin if you trust everything from that host? A whitelist entry in the MTA would avoid wasting resources on

Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread Jari Fredriksson
On 21/06/2008 1:10 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote: I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags: [20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended that you configure trusted_networks manually This is expected and intentional. Your local cf files are

Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread Benny Pedersen
On Sat, June 21, 2008 20:05, Jari Fredriksson wrote: Should? What good is that lint anyway if it can't be used to test local rules? spamassassin 21 -D --lint | less does it confirm ? Benny Pedersen Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net/?coupon=cust37098

Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread Daryl C. W. O'Shea
On 21/06/2008 2:05 PM, Jari Fredriksson wrote: On 21/06/2008 1:10 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote: I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags: [20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended that you configure trusted_networks manually This is expected

Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread Sahil Tandon
Daryl C. W. O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 21/06/2008 1:10 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote: I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags: [20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended that you configure trusted_networks manually This is expected

FM_BIG_REASON scoring

2008-06-21 Thread Robert - elists
Does anyone think that 10 FM_BIG_REASON Lot's of CAP words, BIG, REASON, BEST Is scored high or? - rh

Re: FM_BIG_REASON scoring

2008-06-21 Thread Sahil Tandon
Robert - elists [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone think that 10 FM_BIG_REASON Lot's of CAP words, BIG, REASON, BEST Is scored high or? Seems high to me, but needs to be put in the context of your threshold. -- Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: FM_BIG_REASON scoring

2008-06-21 Thread Robert - elists
Seems high to me, but needs to be put in the context of your threshold. -- Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Threshold? Huh? You are joking right? The default SA scoring spam tagging threshold is half that... :-) - rh

Re: FM_BIG_REASON scoring

2008-06-21 Thread Sahil Tandon
Robert - elists [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Threshold? Yes, threshold. Huh? What is so confusing? You are joking right? No. The default SA scoring spam tagging threshold is half that... Exactly. That is why I said it does seem high (in this case, assuming the default threshold of

Re: trusted_networks set in local.cf, but not according to sa-update

2008-06-21 Thread Daryl C. W. O'Shea
On 21/06/2008 10:45 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 21/06/2008 1:10 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote: I see the following when running sa-update with debug flags: [20528] dbg: conf: trusted_networks are not configured; it is recommended that you configure