On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Ron Peterson wrote:
>
> > Meanwhile, I've purchased a handful of Intel PRO/1000 MT adapters which
> > I'm going to try. If I have the same problem with a completely different
> > adapter, that should rule that out.
>
> Lost the machine again, but getting closer to the cause
David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Michael Sims wrote:
>> Basically I say all this to ask a question. Is it possible that this
>> message is taking so long to transfer that the MD slave is dying
>> before it is fully received, and this is what is causing the broken
>> pipe error?
>
> Nop
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Michael Sims wrote:
> Basically I say all this to ask a question. Is it possible that this
> message is taking so long to transfer that the MD slave is dying before it
> is fully received, and this is what is causing the broken pipe error?
Nope. No slave is even involved un
Last night I saw an MIMEDefang error in my mail logs that I have never
noticed before:
### TRACKING MESSAGE: i1R1dKT7023699
Feb 26 23:02:39 mx sendmail[23699]: i1R1dKT7023699:
from=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, size=14033627, class=0, nrcpts=2,
msgid=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, proto=ESMTP,
daemon=MTA, relay=exam
For a quick change on a server in place with plenty of ram with tmpfs
compiled and configured to /dev/shm, does anyone see a problem with just
adding the following (or very similar) to the mimedefang startup script?
cd /dev/shm
mkdir MIMEDefang
chmod 700 MIMEDefang
chown defang.defang MIMEDefang
l
Jon R. Kibler said:
> You may want to see this posting regarding caching other things:
> http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/pipermail/mimedefang/2004-February/019800.html
Thanks for hte information on that Jon, I learned a little more about some
good sendmail tweaks.
Just put in my little 2 c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02/27/2004 01:25:55
> PM:
>
> > You cannot run a high-volume MIMEDefang server *without* a RAMdisk.
> > Consider it mandatory.
>
> How should the ramdisk be sized? Besides /var/spool/MIMEDefang, what else
> should be on it?
Make RAM Disk
Quoting Paul Heinlein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Which RFC(s) do these timeouts violate?
>
> RFC 1123, section 5.3.2.
>
> -- Paul Heinlein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I don't see any "MUST"s in there, just some "SHOULD"s. I don't think it
violates it,
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Which RFC(s) do these timeouts violate?
RFC 1123, section 5.3.2.
-- Paul Heinlein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
h
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02/27/2004 01:25:55
PM:
> You cannot run a high-volume MIMEDefang server *without* a RAMdisk.
> Consider it mandatory.
How should the ramdisk be sized? Besides /var/spool/MIMEDefang, what else
should be on it?
___
Visit htt
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Steve Moore wrote:
> I am trying to plan for MD/SA deployment here. I would like to get the
> benefit of experienced MD/SA users' concerning performance. Our site
> processes up to 500,000 messages daily. Our average message size is
> 30KB. Our max mail message size is 100
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
My intent is not to start a protracted argument over this but:
The way I read RFC 1123, assuming you understand the implications of
changing the sendmail timeout values and you are doing so for a valid
reason, you are NOT in violation of the RFC to m
I am trying to plan for MD/SA deployment here. I would like to get the
benefit of experienced MD/SA users' concerning performance. Our site
processes up to 500,000 messages daily. Our average message size is
30KB. Our max mail message size is 100MB. We have two AIX 5.1 machines
running com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02/27/2004 11:15:36
AM:
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Which RFC(s) do these timeouts violate?
>
> RFC 1123, section 5.3.2.
Which states "Based on extensive experience with busy mail-relay hosts,
the
minimum per-command timeout values SHOULD b
This whole section is advisory, being full of "SHOULD" entries, rather than
"MUST" entries - see section 1.3.2 for details of the terminology.
In addition, it has been superceded by technology, as the idea of waiting at
least five minutes for a remote server to send a command is now simply ludicro
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Which RFC(s) do these timeouts violate?
RFC 1123, section 5.3.2.
-- Paul Heinlein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
h
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of James Beal
>
> What I would prefer is to create a new mail message which has
> the same subject as the original, which has its body as the
> spam report and has the original email as an attachment
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of David Va
>
> Dear experts,
>
> I have just installed MIMEDefang and SpamAssassin onto
> newly upgraded sendmail 8.12 on my RH 7.2. I have not
> configured much yet in mimedefang-filter, just admin'
Dear experts,
I have just installed MIMEDefang and SpamAssassin onto
newly upgraded sendmail 8.12 on my RH 7.2. I have not
configured much yet in mimedefang-filter, just admin's
name and e-mail.
Then I cannot send a mail from my Outlook account. I
checked mailq and saw there were many mails defe
I've been working on adding disclaimers to messages based on the
recipient domain.
To do this, I'm using a table lookup to get a message based on the
value of Domain as returned by stream_by_domain and using this in the
append_text_boilerplate in filter_end.
It all works as expected with the corr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02/26/2004 07:35:21
PM:
> I use these timeouts on a 5k a day mail server.
> Got original timeouts from list that. Works for me.
> Your mileage may vary.
> Before I had timeouts modified I had too many slaves just hanging around
> on my system.
>
> Violates RFC. I have
Using the example mimedefang filter when a message gets tagged as spam we do the
following.
action_change_header("X-Spam-Score", " ($score) $hits $names");
md_graphdefang_log('spam', $hits, $RelayAddr);
# If you find the SA report useful, add it, I guess...
action_add_part($entity, "text/plain"
Dear all
i want to install mimedefang on Solaris 9 Sparc Platform without using
spammassassin
what changes i have to do in mimedefang-filter or it will just it self to
current enviroment
or User Murat Posted a filter_begin without using spamassassin ( which is
pasted at below )
Any suggestion wi
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Sims" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 1:24 AM
Subject: RE: [Mimedefang] Tracing/Debugging MIMEDefang
> Yes, although I would suggest something like this:
>
> action_add_header('X-Debug-Msg', "Deleting recipie
I need to convert this procmail recipe for use in
mimedefang-filter:
:0BHc
* !^X-Spam: YES
* !^X-Loop: TRUE
* ^Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
| formail -a "X-Loop: TRUE" -i "To: mailchk" -i "Subject: *** Attachment *** " -
I "Apparently-To: " -I "Bcc: " -I "Cc: " | /usr/lib/sendmail -t -oi
I
25 matches
Mail list logo
