On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 01:45:57PM -0800, Royce Williams wrote:
What is the optimal configuration (local.cf or other) for an ISP's
MSAs to prevent unauthenticated dynamic-IP customers from triggering
dynamic tests, but still benefiting from general filtering?
I was hoping for a magical
Hi,
I’m building a new 3.3.1 SpamAssassin box from scratch, and ran into a small
problem when I ran —lint:
$ spamassassin --lint
Apr 2 11:24:05.923 [22379] warn: plugin: failed to create instance of
plugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::EmailBL.pm: Bareword
Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::EmailBL
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Henrik K h...@hege.li wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 01:45:57PM -0800, Royce Williams wrote:
What is the optimal configuration (local.cf or other) for an ISP's
MSAs to prevent unauthenticated dynamic-IP customers from triggering
dynamic tests, but still
Hi,
What is the optimal configuration (local.cf or other) for an ISP's
MSAs to prevent unauthenticated dynamic-IP customers from triggering
dynamic tests, but still benefiting from general filtering?
I was hoping for a magical 'mua_networks' option, which let me
enumerate the IP space that
On Sat, 3 Apr 2010 06:18:25 -0800
Royce Williams royce.willi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Henrik K h...@hege.li wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 01:45:57PM -0800, Royce Williams wrote:
What is the optimal configuration (local.cf or other) for an ISP's
MSAs to prevent
On Sat, 3 Apr 2010, Henrik K wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 01:45:57PM -0800, Royce Williams wrote:
What is the optimal configuration (local.cf or other) for an ISP's
MSAs to prevent unauthenticated dynamic-IP customers from triggering
dynamic tests, but still benefiting from general
Whoops - forgot to reply-all; resending with minor modifications.
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 9:10 AM, RW rwmailli...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 3 Apr 2010 06:18:25 -0800
Royce Williams royce.willi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Henrik K h...@hege.li wrote:
On Fri, Apr
On Sat, 3 Apr 2010 10:24:43 -0800
Royce Williams royce.willi...@gmail.com wrote:
Putting the address ranges into internal_networks is what you do if
you *don't* have separate MSAs and MX servers. Otherwise you you
put the MSAs into msa_networks and internal_networks. Anything that
*It allows you to adjust the relative priority of spam processing. If SA
is not invoked during SMTP (i.e. not during the interactive part of mail
exchange, where the computer on the other end has to wait for it to finish
processing before it can go on to the next message it wants to send), then
