To reduce CustMapsList processing time, you can, with most of 'big
blacklist' mainteners (spamcop, rbl, ..) do local a mirror for the zones in
a local dns server, so you could reduce dns traffic dramaticaly and
custmaplist response time by saying xmail to use the local dns server.

Note that I never used this setup for local custmaslists, as we have enought
bandwidth et power for our current usage. So don't ask me how to do (or at
last ressort ;-) ). First check the list maintener web site for instructions
;-)

Francis

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de Rob Arends
>Envoyé : mercredi 15 février 2006 15:07
>À : [email protected]
>Objet : [xmail] Re: Spammers - How to block them.
>
>
>
>The email response below reminds me of the real causes of your 
>slow-to-drop
>connections.
>
>>  XMail slows down considerably when I use CustMapsList in server.tab.
>
>The process as I understand it for an email that is to be dropped.
>
>1. Remote server starts SMTP connection to xMail.
>2. xMail looks up IP in CustMapsList.  (if found then goto 5)
>3. xMail accepts the [Mail from] and [rcpt to] info.
>4. xMail looks up the SMTP-MaxErrors, the local users and aliases, and
>rejects as needed. (maybe even a predata filter)
>5. xMail drops the connection.
>
>Ok.
>Points 1,3,4,5 are all very easy to understand and configure.  
>After all,
>this is what we have been discussing over the last few days.
>
>Point 2........
>The longer the CustMapsList the longer the delay before xMail 
>can determine
>that the IP was black listed.
>xMail will ask each of the RBLs if they have the IP listed, (I 
>think this
>synchronously, but could be in asynchronously).  If 
>synchronously, then the
>longer the list of RBLS, the longer before xMail can continue.
>Even asynchronously xMail would have to wait for the last one to reply.
>Obviously if one of the RBLs returns true, then the process stops
>immediately.
>
>Now even if you don't have a long list of RBLs, the issue 
>could still be in
>this area.
>How fast is your DNS server response?
>If it times out often or just can't cope, that will lengthen 
>the time for
>the RBL responses to xMail.
>
>You can see that one SMTP connection starts a dozen other 
>connections before
>the user [rcpt to] is even sent to xMail.  Now multiply that by all the
>connections you have, and......  You get the picture.
>
>I can't remember the number of times xMail connection faults have been
>reported on this list and they boiled down to DNS issues.
>
>Please check your DNS response time and potentially reduce the 
>RBL list, or
>put the most likely match as the first RBL listed.
>
>Get Ethereal and watch your SMTP traffic, you will be amazed 
>at the amount
>of traffic one connection spawns.
>It will also give you an idea of your DNS traffic.  Remember 
>to use a hub
>(or a switch with a monitor port) to capture the traffic, 
>unless you run
>Ethereal on the xMail server.
>
>Rob :-)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of Henri van Riel
>Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 6:19 AM
>To: Jeff Buehler
>Cc: [email protected]
>Subject: [xmail] Re: Spammers - How to block them.
>
>
>Hi Jeff,
>
>> I suspect this makes little difference, but just in case you aren't 
>> aware of this, you can run ASSP on a different computer - it doesn't 
>> have to be the same system, and so Perl also does not need to be on 
>> your XMail system.  I'm not certain why you have feelings about 
>> running something in front of XMail if it will simply reduce the 
>> burden on your server (significantly) but we all have our reasons, I 
>> suppose!
>
>The main reason for not wanting anything installed before 
>XMail is mainly
>because I've been having bad experiences with AVmailGate but 
>also because
>I'd much rather have XMail solve my problem. There must be a 
>way without
>having to install (and maintain) several tools.
>
>> If you aren't processing much email, then I can't understand why you 
>> are getting the "server too busy" errors you mentioned in your first 
>> email. Something doesn't sound quite right.  Frankly, even before I 
>> was running ASSP, I was processing quite a bit of email (thousands a 
>> day, sometimes more, and thousands more a day of SPAM) and I never 
>> received an error like that on send.
>
>That's odd. How many smtp threads were you running? I've set 
>the maximum to
>16 now where 4 should be enough to handle all incoming mail (easily!).
>
>> I understood you to say that you were getting SMTP connect errors 
>> because XMail was taking too long to refuse invalid users.
>> Logically, if you are receiving server too busy errors simply from 
>> refusing emails to non-valid users (as I read your first email to be 
>> saying), which would require an incredible volume of invalid 
>email (or 
>> a very, very slow server), then the only way to prevent server 
>> overload would be to put something in front of XMail, since XMail is 
>> already refusing those emails that are causing the problem.  But I 
>> must have misunderstood given the direction the rest of this thread 
>> has taken.
>
>The server won't break any speed records, that's true. Still, 
>it should be
>more than good enough for my purposes. XMail slows down 
>considerably when I
>use CustMapsList in server.tab. My guess is that these 
>services are very
>slow and XMail has to check 4 or 5 for each and every email it 
>receives. I
>guess all my smtp threads are busy waiting for a reply from 
>these anti-spam
>services and are unable to allow other connections. Setting 
>SMTP-RDNSCheck
>to "1" in my server.tab also slows down mail processing in XMail.
>
>> If it is simply an issue of SPAM in general, and you need to 
>block it, 
>> and you don't want to use something like ASSP (for reasons of 
>> purity?), then your best bet is greylisting (as Rob Arends covers 
>> well), RBL blocking, and perhaps something like you mention with an 
>> automated addition to the spammers list as a last addition.
>
>It's not the spam per se, I know how to get rid of that. It's 
>because 99.5%
>of all incoming mail is for non-existent recipients. I don't 
>want to check
>them all to see if it's spam or not cause I already
>*know* it's spam. I don't want to waste server resources and internet
>bandwidth for something I already know I don't want. I just 
>want to get rid
>of those attempts from spammers to deliver spam to my server 
>as quickly and
>as easily as possible. 
>
>--
>Henri.
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in
>the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in
>the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to