[toaster] Splitting the Toaster

2008-04-24 Thread Gary Bowling
I have struggled lately with my server utilization and am now planning to upgrade my hardware. It occurs to me that the majority of my utilization problems are due to spam and virus checking and not general email. How difficult is it to split the spam and clam components off to a

Re: [toaster] Splitting the Toaster

2008-04-24 Thread Joey Novak
We had a setup where spamd was running on another server (this is extremely easy to setup) but clamd was still on the mail server for about 2 years, but as mail load continued to increase, eventually even that wasn't enough. We now run a cluster with 5 mail nodes, a load director, and an NFS

Re: [toaster] Splitting the Toaster

2008-04-24 Thread Bill Shupp
On Apr 24, 2008, at 8:37 AM, Gary Bowling wrote: I have struggled lately with my server utilization and am now planning to upgrade my hardware. It occurs to me that the majority of my utilization problems are due to spam and virus checking and not general email. How difficult is it to

Re: [toaster] Splitting the Toaster

2008-04-24 Thread Harm van Tilborg
Hi Bill, What exactly is the benefit of using clamd-stream-client? What we do is we have seperate boxes that receive e-mail (6 systems in total), which are announced as four different MX hosts. They all do spam (spamassassin) and virus (clam) scanning, and forward e-mail (if it contains no

Re: [toaster] Splitting the Toaster

2008-04-24 Thread Bill Shupp
On Apr 24, 2008, at 10:22 AM, Harm van Tilborg wrote: Hi Bill, What exactly is the benefit of using clamd-stream-client? What we do is we have seperate boxes that receive e-mail (6 systems in total), which are announced as four different MX hosts. They all do spam (spamassassin) and virus

[toaster] greylisting

2008-04-24 Thread Lampa
Hello, which value do you use for minutes/seconds until email is accepted ? I tried many values and found that something between 6 - 13 (15 for some servers) are optimal. I'm using greylisting for incoming emails, clients have own dedicated ip range. Thank you. -- Lampa

[toaster] Delivery Status Notification (Failure) - spammers

2008-04-24 Thread Andras Kende
Hello, Can you tell me what is the best way to deal with Delivery Status Notification (Failure) notices if due to spammers faking sender from field? Thanks, Andras Kende

Re: [toaster] Delivery Status Notification (Failure) - spammers

2008-04-24 Thread Bill Shupp
On Apr 24, 2008, at 12:59 PM, Andras Kende wrote: Hello, Can you tell me what is the best way to deal with Delivery Status Notification (Failure) notices if due to spammers faking sender from field? Enabling SPF can help. Regards, Bill