|
John, I do recall seeing this stuff, but I came away with the impression that it was only applicable if you were behind a particular type of firewall that had issues with the size of the packets or something to that tune. If this was causing many timeouts, I would have seen a slight increase in spam getting through I would think, but nothing out of the ordinary has occurred that I am aware of. It is possible however that the new capability of the Windows 2003 DNS server is what is causing the extra processor utilization, and I don't think that I benefit from having it on, so I'll try turning it off using the registry hack and then see if it makes any difference. I'm also going to look at what ways if any are available to tune the cache in DNS, thinking that a substantial difference here might also be an issue. Thanks, Matt John Tolmachoff (Lists) wrote: This was covered quite extensively on the Imail list oh probably a year ago.>From my memory (we all know what that means) there are 2 possible issues: 1. If there is more than 1 IP on the server, Imail was sending DNS tests requests (ala Imail Anti-Spam) on one IP and the response was coming back to a different IP in Windows 2003 DNS service. This was a minor problem, and was never known to affect Declude that I can remember. 2. Windows 2003 DNS service added/changed configuration which the end result was the length of the data was greater than it should be and that was causing problems. Again, this is in the Imail archives. If I did not have so much work right now, I would help did them up as I was one of the persons involved in investigating it. Fixes were registry settings. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Aaron Moreau-Cook Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 12:02 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Overflow directory and a note aboutWindows 2003DNS I know I'm not aware, care to expand? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff (Lists) Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:59 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Overflow directory and a note aboutWindows |
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Overflow directory and... Matt
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Overflow director... R. Scott Perry
- [Declude.JunkMail] Supporting Users ... Gary Brumm
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Overflow dire... Matt
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Overflow ... Darrell \([EMAIL PROTECTED])
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Overf... Matt
- RE: [Declude.JunkMail] ... John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
- Re: [Declude.JunkMail] ... Matt
- RE: [Declude.JunkMa... John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
- Re: [Declude.Ju... Matt
- Re: [Declude.Ju... Dave Doherty
