Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Poor man's high reliability?

2006-05-19 Thread Sanford Whiteman
...and to make things a bit more confusing...an NS query to my various servers for different domains always sends the first response in the registrar order and then it randomizes after the first request. So this means that the load should be heavier on the primary name

Re: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Poor man's high reliability?

2006-05-19 Thread Dave Doherty
For example, database-backed sites whose database can be open for writing at only one site are a *helluva* lot harder to balance. You're right about that. There is some interactivity on the site, but it all results in emails to the office, so no db sync'ing issues here. -d --- This

RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Poor man's high reliability?

2006-05-19 Thread Robert Grosshandler
Another option to consider ... www.ultradns.com has a service that does this. I've never priced it, so it may be pricey. Rob --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Poor man's high reliability?

2006-05-19 Thread Darrell \([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Side ntoe: UltraDNS has been having some issues the last couple of days due to the blue security ordeal - http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/05/18/2158227.shtml Darrell --- Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude, Imail, mxGuard,

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Poor man's high reliability?

2006-05-19 Thread Colbeck, Andrew
UltraDNS is back in business after the kind of DoS they are supposed to be in business to defend against. Check out Brian Kreb's article here, from May-17-2006: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/05/blue_security_surrend ers_but_s.html Specifically this snippet: Well, UltraDNS

[Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Kevin Bilbee
Has anyone else seen an increase of spam since Blue Security wet offline?? We have seen an increase and we did not even use the software/service. Kevin Bilbee Network Administrator Standard Abrasives, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (805) 520-5800 x7332 Changing the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Dave Doherty
I have noticed more stuff has been getting through. I don't know whether that represents a general increase or new spammer techniques. -d - Original Message - From: Kevin Bilbee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: JunkMail Declude declude.junkmail@declude.com Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 1:33 PM

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Rick Baranowski
Same here Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Doherty Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 12:01 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam I have noticed more stuff has been getting through. I don't know

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Pete McNeil
On Friday, May 19, 2006, 1:33:06 PM, Kevin wrote: KB Has anyone else seen an increase of spam since Blue Security wet offline?? KB We have seen an increase and we did not even use the software/service. We've noted a few bursts today but nothing completely out of the ordinary. _M --- This

Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Pete McNeil
One thing that we noticed a few hours ago was a new image spam that has quite a bit of bandwidth behind it and all new zombies - perhaps that's a piece of it. _M On Friday, May 19, 2006, 3:30:33 PM, Rick wrote: RB Same here RB Rick RB -Original Message- RB From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RB

RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread John T \(Lists\)
Yes, that looks to be what I have been seeing get through. John T eServices For You Seek, and ye shall find! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete McNeil Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 12:41 PM To: Rick Baranowski

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Michael Thomas - Mathbox
Dave, You might want to look at the NOCRTEST. See: http://www.mail-archive.com/declude.junkmail@declude.com/msg28884.html The problem is that the messages have no carriage returns. I am guessing here and that guess is based on a lot of circumstantial evidence that Declude was written in Visual

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Dave Doherty
You might want to look at the NOCRTEST. Thanks! I'll try it out. -d --- 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.

Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Sanford Whiteman
...a lot of circumstantial evidence that Declude was written in Visual Basic... Er, what evidence was that? Declude.exe was *not* written in VB, as a quick Dependency Walker check would tell you. It's clearly always been a Win32 C/C++ app. As far as the CRLF issue goes, it's

RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam

2006-05-19 Thread Michael Thomas - Mathbox
Sandy, Shrug. Never felt the desire to run dependency walker on it. I said it was a guess. I said it was circumstantial. Maybe in the end, I was hoping it was some silly language limitation that they didn't know how to get around rather than think it was a bug or even a bad assumption on the part