Sanford Whiteman wrote:
I am not denying _you_ shared credit for the concept with the
Postfix people, but the idea that your "friend" the vendor can claim
it as intellectual property, when you spec'd it out and have
documentation of same -- and that that's why you're playing
Sandy,
That link indicates that they actually work in reverse by whitelisting
things from greylisting instead this is the other way around where it
qualifies messages for greylisting. Considering how successful and
accurate this method is, I would suggest that it is better. I can't of
course
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt
Sent: 26. maj 2006 00:16
Declude could easily plug into
Alligate if they wanted to since it supports dropping files into a directory
instead of delivering them, and then it will pick them up when the
] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 6:16 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Pieced below:
Jay Sudowski - Handy Networks LLC wrote:
I am contemplating implementing Alligate with SmarterMail in some fashion, and
would like to pick your
HANDY x882 | Fax: 888-300-2FAX
www.handynetworks.com
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 6:16 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Pieced below
Pieced below:
Jay Sudowski - Handy Networks LLC wrote:
I am contemplating implementing Alligate with SmarterMail in some fashion, and would like to pick your mind on the following:
1) SmarterMail does a great, great job at handling a huge number of SMTP threads so dictionary attacks are
@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
The only way that we have detected this was with Imail and mail being
stuck
in the spool. ...network stack causing loss of functionality for basic
network operations is generic but if I remember correctly when this
happened the admin
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 10:36 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
David,
That did the trick. I can't even see any messages in my proc folder any more.
I might suggest adding your explanation to the comments
@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Andrew,
Thanks for your notes and their history.
I'm using the following settings right now:
THREADS30
WAITFORMAIL500
WAITFORTHREADS200
WAITBETWEENTHREADS100
WINSOCKCLEANUPOFF
INVITEFIXON
AUTOREVIEW
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
The only way that we have detected this was with Imail and mail being stuck
in the spool. ...network stack causing loss of functionality for basic
network operations is generic but if I remember correctly when
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:25 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Andrew,
Thanks for your notes and their history.
I'm using the following settings right now:
THREADS30
WAITFORMAIL500
WAITFORTHREADS
: 877-70 HANDY x882 | Fax: 888-300-2FAX
www.handynetworks.com
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:25 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 10:36 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
David,
That did the trick. I can't even see any messages in my proc folder
any
gatewayed? Or is it running on the same server as
Imail?
-Erik
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 5:58 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
I indicated
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Andrew,
Thanks for your notes and their history.
I'm using the following settings right now:
THREADS30
WAITFORMAIL500
WAITFORTHREADS200
WAITBETWEENTHREADS100
WINSOCKCLEANUPOFF
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 8:12 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Darrell,
I put up two Windows Explorer windows side-by-side under normal volume
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Darrell,
I put up two Windows Explorer windows side-by-side under normal volume
and the pattern was consistent where the proc folder grows while the
work folder shrinks until the work folder hits zero at which point the
proc folder empties out
, May 23, 2006 7:34 AM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
The purpose of WINSOCKCLEANUPON is to reset the winsock, what
happens when using this setting is that when the \proc directory hit 0
decludeproc will finish processing all the messages in the \work before
checking
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
I found that WINSOCKCLEANUP ON would force a reset if the \proc directory
never hits 0. In this case, files build up in the \review subfolder which
require manual processing.
- Original Message -
From
: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
David,
That did the trick. I can't even see any messages in my proc folder
any more. I might suggest adding your explanation to the comments in
the file just in case others feel the need to turn this on like I did.
I recalled
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
David,
That did the trick. I can't even see any messages in my proc folder
any more. I might suggest adding your explanation to the comments in
the file just in case others feel the need to turn this on like I
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick
HayerSent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 11:33 AMTo:
Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
Experience with 4.x
Very nice!It looks like Matt has taught you well on how to
comment a file :)-NickColbeck, Andrew wrote:
I'd
"Those who cannot remember their mistakes are doomed to
repeat them!"
Andrew 8)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
MattSent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 12:26 PMTo:
Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
Experienc
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 7:48 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Mike,
1. The WINSOCKCLEANUPON activates when the \Proc
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Barker
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 7:48 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Mike,
1. The WINSOCKCLEANUPON activates when the \Proc reaches 0
2. If Decludeproc stops unexpectedly files
to need to
the fix and may offer some further insight here.
Andrew.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:30 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
to need to the
fix and may offer some further insight here.
Andrew.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:30 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:26 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Thanks, David.
I've read all of the support forum emails that have been
making that change to the firewall V4
runs fine.
Good luck
John
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:36 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
David
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
David, that sounds like the case I saw that noted that his
firewall wasn't allowing outbound DNS and also noted that
implementing WINSOCKCLEANUP ON worked for him. I wasn't at
all sure that the winsock fix was relevant
turn it back on.
John
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Colbeck, Andrew
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:26 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Thanks, David.
I've read all
The problem with this architecture is that when it moves a batch of
messages into the work folder for processing, it quickly pegs the
processor at 100% as it launches all of the threads, but most messages go
through all of the steps quickly so the processors sit almost idle while
it is waiting
Darrell,
I've tweaked the settings, knowing the issues before I tried 4.x. The
problem is that because they are batch processing and because there is
significant latency in scanning some messages to factors such as
messages size, virus scanning and DNS timeouts, the server does nothing
for
It's a faulty design that leaves more than half a server's CPU capacity
unused due to the mere fact that they wait for all threads to complete
before moving in a new batch.
I can't speak to what you see on your server, but that is not how it is
running on my server. I just double checked
I have a few more things to add now with a little more testing.
I let my gateways backup on E-mail so that I could slam Declude, and
here's what happens.
When Declude is not hitting it's THREADS setting, it waits until the
work folder is empty before moving in a new batch. When Declude is
Darrell,
I put up two Windows Explorer windows side-by-side under normal volume
and the pattern was consistent where the proc folder grows while the
work folder shrinks until the work folder hits zero at which point the
proc folder empties out and everything lands in work and then the
I'd sure like to see some Declude comments on this discussion.
Ben
BC Web
- Original Message -
From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
Darrell,
I put up two Windows Explorer
37 matches
Mail list logo
