Are you using something more than the stock blocklist? That can reduce your
scanning load substantially.
Justice London wrote:
> Yeah, but it's better than just getting the message rejected, which
> seems to be happening right now if something happens to spamassassin.
> This is bad since our clients then call and complain to no end.
>
> Justice London
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 21:31 +0200, Janno Sannik wrote:
>> seems dangerous since this could be exploited by hitting mailserver with
>> lot's of spam and getting it to go through that way
>>
>> Justice London wrote:
>>> Is there a way to get simscan/spamassassin to do a soft reject of
>>> messages, say under high load situations where spamassassin isn't
>>> responding properly? I have found that when spamassassin either can't
>>> accept a new connection, for whatever reason, that the client is passed
>>> a 451 error right away. Is there a way to instead just have simscan
>>> fail the spamassassin test and just pass the message un-checked?
>>>
>>> Justice London
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
--
-Eric 'shubes'
---------------------------------------------------------------------
QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
