I do not know why I did not think of this before. Of course, knowing my
fortune, many of you probably already figured this out.
It appears that using IS to check the subject line has always been iffy.
I thought of a solution: Use ENDSWITH instead of IS.
Just an FYI.
John T
eServices For You
An update: There is a known problem with external tests and Declude 3.0.3.x.
They are aware of it and are working on it.
It is recommended if you are using an external program, you should revert to
a pre 3.x version for now.
John T
eServices For You
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL P
Dan,
You place this command in your virus.cfg file.
AVAFTERJM ON
Darrell
Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And
Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, M
Thanks, Richard. That sort of makes sense assuming that AVAFTERJM means the
e-mail is going to be scanned for viruses after it is scanned for spam. It
means that many fewer messages will be scanned for viruses. And if AV is
hogging the CPU that could make a big difference.
Do you know where
This is a known bug with 2.0.6. I wrote up some of my findings on this
under 2.0.6 - see this post.
http://www.mail-archive.com/declude.junkmail@declude.com/msg24938.html
Darrell
Check out http://www.invariantsystems.co
Greetings all,
We're planning on upgrading to iMail 8.21 this week, and wanted to see if
anyone know of any significant problems with this latest release and Declude
2.06+AV+FProt+Sniffer+invURIbl2.5.
We're still affected by too many Declude processes that somehow get spawned,
locking up mail
All tests finished within seconds.
John T
eServices For You
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 9:06 AM
> To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
> Subject: Re: [
The same thing was happening to me and I was told to try AVAFTERJM
command and it made a world of difference...the only draw back I have seen
is more spam in spamreview...
Richard Farris
Ethixs Online
1.270.247. Office
1.800.548.3877 Tech Support
"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet"
-
Has anyone else been experiencing time
outs for users with the dreaded Sending and Receiving' reported
error (0x8004210A)? I am getting quite a few complaints on timeouts on the
mail server, Not everyone experiences this but I am getting lots of calls about
it on Monday mornings. Seems if
John,
One of the other bugs I have seen is if a process takes more than 5 minutes
to complete and is configured as a "weight" test and Declude terminates it
they use the OS result code of "259" as the returned weight instead of
defaulting to zero.
Darrell
John Tolmachoff (Lists) writes:
FYI to all running the Beta, I have reviewed and verified a problem brought
to my attention by Kami.
It appears that some times, even though the external test is reporting an
exit code of 0, DecludeJM is treating it as a fail and adding the configured
weight.
This goes for both positive weights l
Hi Dan-
SKIPIFWEIGHT n skips the test if the weight is at or above n.
MAXWEIGHT n stops testing when the weight (achieved within the filter, I
believe) reaches or exceeds n.
I delete on 20, so I have both n values set to 20.
The first two lines of my filter files are
SKIPIFWEIGHT20
MAXWE
Hello, All,
We are using Declude 2.0.6 with JunkMail Pro and Virus Standard.
We are getting killed on the CPU usage front. I'm pretty sure that it's not
a bug in Declude but rather has to do with the sheer amount of e-mail that
the spammers are now sending into the machine we are running IMail
13 matches
Mail list logo
