> You said "At the moment I'm already over this limit" --
> because you have 21 IPBYPASS entries. My comment was that
> because you have more than 20 entries, some of them will not
> be used by Declude JunkMail. It will only use 20 of them.
And if I discover other MTAs in this two IP blocks I would need much more then 21
entries...
> >But if I whitelist an IP or IP-range wouldn't this whitelist the
> >message generally and avoid that other spam-tests are able
> to catch the spam?
>
> Correct.
It's tecnical so difficult to change this IPBYPASS handling from fixed 20 to something
else?
> One other option might be to use "HOPHIGH 1", which will scan
> an extra hop for all E-mail. Then, the negative weighting
> for their IP will help the E-mail, but if the next IP is
> "bad", then the E-mail will be more likely to get caught.
I use already a hophigh=1
This is very usefull with other messages but in this case it will catch also the
second MTA from this blacklisted IP-Blocks and so double the points comming from IP
blacklists. This makes more difficult to define a suitable average counterweight.
It's simple to whitelist all messages from this IPs but an intelligent solution that
allows to bypass entire IP ranges would by much better.
Markus
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://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.
