Re: IMAP SpamPal.
Hi, On Saturday, July 17, 2004 21:37 your local time, which was 20:37 my local time, Charles Gerungan [CMG] wrote; I've been on the SpamPal forums and James Farmer (SpamPals developer) couldn't assist me with my current problems. http://www.spampalforums.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5879 Can someone take a look at the forum and maybe help where James couldn't? -- Regards, Chris Created using The Bat! v2.12.03 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP SpamPal.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris Weaven wrote: | CMG Alternatively, you could connect to your IMAP server with telnet and see | CMG when it times out. | How would I go about doing this? Apologies, I heard Telnet mentioned all | the time, but never really got around to working out what it was used | for and how to use it. Google for IMAP4 session example. If you need more help, tell us what you don't understand. - -- Regards, Charles. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFA/FGAG3RhRxqSqtMRAtVoAKCaWBnJgBxbRGrlgTkv/wZgpsQvEQCeNi+m Tueu8+3d3RhDz2xH3IZ0kWY= =bQVQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP SpamPal.
Hi Charles, On Friday, July 16, 2004 01:50 your local time, which was 00:50 my local time, Charles Gerungan [CMG] wrote; CW 1. I tried connecting to my IMAP server straight through SpamPal with no CW TLS and therefore no stunnel. CMG My bad. I would've thought you'd tried this. CW This again causes a the disconnection. CMG That's why I said this is an stunnel issue, if that.. It could be CMG time-out issues on the server, severe latency -- whatever. I not sure if the above made sense, but when connecting to the IMAP server without TLS and therefore without stunnel, I'm still getting the 'Server Closed Connection' message? This is purely TB! and SpamPal, no stunnel. Another thing I do notice though, I SpamPal still has the connection to the server open!? Therefore, I'm think TB! is losing it's connection with SpamPal for some reason? Any ideas? CW Also, on closer inspection of the mail headers (F9), I notice that the CW SpamPal headers are not added!? CMG I wouldn't know. CW Is this correct with IMAP, as all my mail through POP has both the CW SpamPal and the baysian (SpamPal plug-in) headers added!? CMG That would a great question to ask on the SpamPal list. Ok, on further inspection of the 558 page document (Ritlabs, are you taking note? :D ), I remember reading something about IMAP mail not being tagged in the headers, just purely moved to a spam folder. -- Regards, Chris Created using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP SpamPal.
Hello Chris, On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 20:03:01 +0100 UTC, Chris Weaven wrote: CW I not sure if the above made sense, but when connecting to the IMAP CW server without TLS and therefore without stunnel, I'm still getting the CW 'Server Closed Connection' message? It did make sense. Did I make sense? That's why I asked you to see if you could try with another IMAP account. Alternatively, you could connect to your IMAP server with telnet and see when it times out. CW Is this correct with IMAP, as all my mail through POP has both the CW SpamPal and the baysian (SpamPal plug-in) headers added!? Good assumption. It seems logical as SpamPal is not acting as a gateway for IMAP. It could however add a X-header field. -- Regards, Charles. TB! 2.12 RC/4 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 / Courier IMAP 3.0.5 pgpq5Az3TX7qR.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP SpamPal.
Hi Charles, On Saturday, July 17, 2004 21:37 your local time, which was 20:37 my local time, Charles Gerungan [CMG] wrote; CMG It did make sense. Did I make sense? That's why I asked you to see if CMG you could try with another IMAP account. Unfortunately, I've only the one IMAP account. :-( CMG Alternatively, you could connect to your IMAP server with telnet and see CMG when it times out. How would I go about doing this? Apologies, I heard Telnet mentioned all the time, but never really got around to working out what it was used for and how to use it. Here's my opportunity I suppose!? :D -- Regards, Chris Created using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP SpamPal.
Hello Chris, On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:13:38 +0100 UTC, Chris Weaven wrote: CW Has anyone here successfully set-up SpamPal with Stunnel using TLS CW without having these, what appear to be, timeout problems? CMG Have you considered posting this to the stunnel list at mirt.net? CW Hmm, didn't really want to join a mailing list to ask one question, but CW should that be the only option, then so be it. The experts on stunnel are there, and this is an stunnel issue, if that. CMG Or, put another way, does your connection improve when using another CMG mua or mailserver? CW Sorry, but that went straight over my head :-( Does your connection improve if you use another Mail User Agent (like Thunderbird)? Does your connection improve if you use another mailserver (like imap.anotherprovider.tld)? -- Regards, Charles. TB! 2.12 RC/4 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 / Courier IMAP 3.0.5 pgpw1TTRB8IfW.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP SpamPal.
Hi Charles, On Thursday, July 15, 2004 20:17 your local time, which was 19:17 my local time, Charles Gerungan [CMG] wrote; CW Hmm, didn't really want to join a mailing list to ask one question, but CW should that be the only option, then so be it. CMG The experts on stunnel are there, and this is an stunnel issue, if that. I'll join if I have to, but was hoping the knowledgeable people here at TBUDL may be of help! :-) CMG Does your connection improve if you use another Mail User Agent (like CMG Thunderbird)? I only use Thunderbird at work, not here at home. I don't really want to install it here at home at the moment either as I'm keen for TB! to perform and happy with the way Thunderbird works at work. CMG Does your connection improve if you use another mailserver (like CMG imap.anotherprovider.tld)? I only have 1 IMAP account that I can connect to, so I'm kinda limited with my options on this count. I've just tried an alternative here tonight aswell; 1. I tried connecting to my IMAP server straight through SpamPal with no TLS and therefore no stunnel. This again causes a the disconnection. Also, on closer inspection of the mail headers (F9), I notice that the SpamPal headers are not added!? Is this correct with IMAP, as all my mail through POP has both the SpamPal and the baysian (SpamPal plug-in) headers added!? -- Regards, Chris Created using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP SpamPal.
Hello Chris, On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 20:26:56 +0100 UTC, Chris Weaven wrote: CW I'll join if I have to, but was hoping the knowledgeable people here at CW TBUDL may be of help! :-) Well, at least you must be doing something right as at least the moderators of this list don't think that this is off-topic. CW 1. I tried connecting to my IMAP server straight through SpamPal with no CW TLS and therefore no stunnel. My bad. I would've thought you'd tried this. CW This again causes a the disconnection. That's why I said this is an stunnel issue, if that.. It could be time-out issues on the server, severe latency -- whatever. CW Also, on closer inspection of the mail headers (F9), I notice that the CW SpamPal headers are not added!? I wouldn't know. I don't believe in client-side anti-spam systems (well, one, sorta). But I did take a look at the SpamPal page, and if it's just as effective as a well-trained SpamAssassin system, you're halfway there. CW Is this correct with IMAP, as all my mail through POP has both the CW SpamPal and the baysian (SpamPal plug-in) headers added!? That would a great question to ask on the SpamPal list. -- Regards, Charles. TB! 2.12 RC/4 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 / Courier IMAP 3.0.5 pgpk4QWWsv8df.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
