Re: [toaster] Delivery Status Notification (Failure) - spammers
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
[toaster] Delivery Status Notification (Failure) - spammers
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
[toaster] greylisting
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
Re: [toaster] Splitting the Toaster
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 (clam) scanning, and forward e-mail (if it contains no viruses, and a spam score lower then 15) to the MTA servers. If such MX servers (as we call it) fails, there are 5 servers left to replace this one. So concurrency is quite spread out. However, MTA servers are all single, we are still looking for a good solution to this... It just depends how you want to scale your infrastructure. By segregating scanning from smtp, you can put more horsepower behind the scanning segment, and less behind the smtp part. So I think it's more flexible. But it's also more complex than what you're doing. However, if you're using NFS for chkuser lookups, your method might be more taxing on the NFS box. Both solutions will likely work fine, though. Regards, Bill
Re: [toaster] Splitting the Toaster
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 viruses, and a spam score lower then 15) to the MTA servers. If such MX servers (as we call it) fails, there are 5 servers left to replace this one. So concurrency is quite spread out. However, MTA servers are all single, we are still looking for a good solution to this... Kind regards, Harm van Tilborg Bill Shupp wrote: 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 split the spam and clam components off to a different server? Does someone have a "cook book" on how to set this up? It's not hard. I believe simscan let's you specify the spamc arguments (to talk to a remote spamd server). Regarding clamdscan, I use clamd-stream-client, and call it with a shell script. On the client system, I simply replace the clamdscan binary with my shell script (which calls clamd-stream-client to talk to the remote clamd server). No changes to the simscan setup needed for this. Regards, Bill
Re: [toaster] Splitting the Toaster
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 split the spam and clam components off to a different server? Does someone have a "cook book" on how to set this up? It's not hard. I believe simscan let's you specify the spamc arguments (to talk to a remote spamd server). Regarding clamdscan, I use clamd-stream-client, and call it with a shell script. On the client system, I simply replace the clamdscan binary with my shell script (which calls clamd-stream-client to talk to the remote clamd server). No changes to the simscan setup needed for this. Regards, Bill
Re: [toaster] Splitting the Toaster
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 server. Bill also has suggested to us in the past that we separate out smtp traffic into "Customer SMTP Traffic" and "Incoming SMTP Traffic From Other Mail Servers" (by giving out customers a different smtp server to use for relaying mail then the mx records for our mail domains) to allows us to turn up the rbl list strictness on the "Incoming SMTP Traffic From Other Mail Servers", which alleviates a lot of load. We still haven't done this, but we want to. We are in the process of relocating our cluster, and upgrading it to have fully redundant load directors running keepalived, and we are going to try to switch from NFS to Gluster so that we can have fully redundant mail stores as well. Anyways, Sorry, that doesn't really answer your question, but I just wanted to give you my .02. Spamd is easy to move to another server. clamd, not so easy, but Bill has written some kind of wrapper for it to allow you to do it. But, I would recommend you start planning now for a cluster, unless you don't envision mail load to continue growing. Joey On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Gary Bowling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 split the spam and clam components off to a > different server? > > Does someone have a "cook book" on how to set this up? > > Thanks > > Gary > -- C) 540-460-9848 W) 757-233-0834
[toaster] Splitting the Toaster
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 different server? Does someone have a "cook book" on how to set this up? Thanks Gary
