> From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, Jim Hermann - UUN Hostmaster wrote:
> > Why does my dkim-filter make and keep open so many connecting to my 
> > upstream DNS?
> > [...]
> 
> Just to be precise, there's no such thing as a UDP 
> "connection", just a 
> socket that gets reserved for communication with a particular source.
> 
> Are you compiling with USE_ARLIB enabled?  If so, that might 
> be something 
> we can address by fixing that library.  If not, your 
> operating system's 
> resolver library is responsible for the sockets.

I was not using the asynchronous (ARLIB) resolver, so I compiled dkim-filter
version 2.7.0 with define(`bld_USE_ARLIB', `True').

After a week with the new dkim-filter, there are 25 netstat udp entries for
my Upstream Nameserver #1 and 5 entires for the local nameserver, all for
dkim-filter.

None of my other milters leave these netstat udp entries.  I use
milter-greylist, milter-link, and milter-spiff, all use DNS lookups.  The
only other difference is that dkim-filter uses a port to communicate with
Sendmail, while the other milters use UNIX sockets.  

DKIM does not release the tcp ports either.  It has 6 tcp ports open to port
XXXX on the local machine. 

Here are my Sendmail settings:

Xdkim-filter, S=inet:[EMAIL PROTECTED], T=S:1m;R:1m

Thanks for the help.

Jim
-----
Jim Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
UUism Networks <http://www.UUism.net>
Ministering to the Needs of Online UUs
Web Hosting, Email Services, Mailing Lists
-----











-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
dkim-milter-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dkim-milter-discuss

Reply via email to