I guess it depends on what you want to slow down, I mean where in your design you can tolerate the slowdown.
Maybe there should be a dedicated GC located closer to the front-end Exchange servers just serving LDAP queries? -----Original Message----- From: Uriah Heep [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 2:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: IMS indicates outgoing from <> appears to be Spam I guess the question is whether it's quicker to get the RCPT TO:, do the query, and drop the conversation than it would be to fully receive a 33kb virus and THEN drop it. Martin Blackstone wrote: >We were talking about this somewhere else recently and one mentioned >side affect was the fact that since an LDAP query is needed for EVERY >EMAIL, it can really put the slow down on. Our Antispam solution does a >single LDAP catalog download about every 30 minutes and then caches it. >As a result I don't get the junk emails to non existent email address, >nor do I suffer the congestion that the constant query would cause. > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >David, Andy >Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 8:09 AM >To: Exchange Discussions >Subject: RE: IMS indicates outgoing from <> appears to be Spam > >Well sure To^H^HUriah, but I suspect I would be dropping *all* of those >regardless. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Uriah Heep [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 8:11 AM >To: Exchange Discussions >Subject: Re: IMS indicates outgoing from <> appears to be Spam > > >Perhaps it would be if there were ever a virus that hit ><random>@yourdomain.com thousands of times per day, such as >MyDoom/Novarg/Whatever. At least until the virus expired. > >David, Andy wrote: > > > >>I'm not convinced however that that is a feature worth enabling. >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Deji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 11:51 AM >>To: Exchange Discussions >>Subject: RE: IMS indicates outgoing from <> appears to be Spam >> >> >>If you have Recipients filtering on in E2K3, then, yes, Exchange does >>close the session wihtout receiving anything for a non-existent >>address. >> >> >> _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
