Smartermail probably is being more patient and has a longer DNS timing out period than declude. You should really run a cache only DNS directly on your mail server. It will speed your deliver time of your emails and catch more spam for you.
Kevin Bilbee > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gary Steiner > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:56 AM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] ip4r failure > > > That may speed up resolution, but that's not my issue. The > question is why does SmarterMail catch the spam using the same > ip4r tests? It is the same message, and the tests are being > perfomed on the same eml file within a few seconds of each other. > Why does Declude fail and SM succeed? > > Gary > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > From: "John T \(Lists\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 1:22 PM > > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] ip4r failure > > > > Although others opinions may vary, you are better off using a > cache only DNS > > server in-house for you mail server resolution. I do this on the Imail > > server itself. Speeds up resolution. > > > > John T > > eServices For You > > > > "Seek, and ye shall find!" > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary Steiner > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:05 AM > > > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > > > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] ip4r failure > > > > > > How do I find that out? It is just an address that my > hosting provider > > has given me. > > > I have no control over or way to access the DNS server. > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > > > From: "John T \(Lists\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 2:40 AM > > > > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > > > > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] ip4r failure > > > > > > > > What is the OS of the DNS server being used? > > > > > > > > John T > > > > eServices For You > > > > > > > > "Seek, and ye shall find!" > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary Steiner > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 7:27 PM > > > > > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > > > > > Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] ip4r failure > > > > > > > > > > I've been having this problem with Declude going back to > August and my > > > > installation > > > > > of 2.0.6. I'm currently running 3.0.6.4 with SmarterMail 2.6. It > > seems > > > > that > > > > > irregularly Declude's ip4r tests time out, but > SmarterMail redundantly > > > > running the > > > > > same tests has no trouble picking up the spam. I have SM > and Declude > > both > > > > testing > > > > > SPAMCOP, DSBL, CBL, Spamhaus SBL, and Basura. What will > happen is a > > spam > > > > will > > > > > get through Declude, but get caught by SM using the same > tests. For > > > > example, > > > > > following is from the header of a recent message: > > > > > > > > > > X-RBL-Warning: NOLEGITCONTENT: No content unique to > legitimate E-mail > > > > detected. > > > > > X-RBL-Warning: IPNOTINMX: > > > > > X-RBL-Warning: DYNHELO: Dynamic HELO found. > > > > > X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [69.205.200.200] > > > > > X-Declude-Spoolname: 45172055.eml > > > > > X-Declude-Note: Scanned by Declude 3.0.6.4 > > > > (http://www.declude.com/x-note.htm) > > > > > for spam. > > > > > X-Declude-Scan: Score [7] at 21:24:19 on 14 Mar 2006 > > > > > X-Declude-Tests: NOLEGITCONTENT, IPNOTINMX, DYNHELO > > > > > X-Country-Chain: UNITED STATES->destination > > > > > X-SmarterMail-Spam: BAYESIAN FILTERING, CBL, SPAMCOP > > > > > > > > > > I went over this several times with Declude support, and > the best they > > > > were able to > > > > > come up with is for me to add "WINSOCKCLEANUP ON" to my > declude.cfg, > > which > > > > > changed nothing. Using the DNS statement in the global.cfg also > > produced > > > > no effect. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe now that Declude and SmarterTools have such a close > > relationship, > > > > Declude > > > > > can ask SmarterTools how their ip4r tests work. Especially since > > Declude > > > > is supposed > > > > > to be using the DNS server information as set within SmarterMail. > > > > > > > > > > Has anyone else experienced this problem? I'm sure the > next thing I > > will > > > > hear is that > > > > > this problem will go away if I upgrade to SM 3.0 and Declude 4.0. > > > > > > > > > > TIA, > > > > > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
