From: "Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED])" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Backup MX
This is why the "IPBYPASS" is a very good feature. Skip your backup MX
and
process the headers starting at the
lities for Declude And
Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG
Integration, and Log Parsers.
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Grosshandler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 6:56 PM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Back
Hi all --
What is the current best practice for handling backup MXs? It appears to
have gotten harder since the bots seem to target the lower priority MXs.
It seems that the lower priority MX accepts the mail, and then passes it
along to us, but since there isn't the same filtering going on on
I'm breaking down and getting Declude Pro.
In my back of the napkin analysis of the spam that is weighted in the gray
area (HOLD), but it is truly spam, some high percentage of it went straight
for my backup MX.
By adding a little bit of weight, I'm expecting that the total weight will
be suffici
Rob,
I have recently discovered that the pro version's filter capabilities
are a very important tool for tagging spam that otherwise passes
through. I would recommend the upgrade highly, though not specifically
for this purpose. I've been able to add points to low scoring spam with
a very hi
down".
Andrew.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Navarre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 10:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Backup MX / Spam
You could write a filter that searches the headers for your backup server's
Yeah, but.
Declude Standard - no filters.
Otherwise, it would work. The idea is to add enough weight to bring it over
the edge.
A problem with the primary down test is that Declude is doing its scanning
on the primary, and it would never be down when Declude was scanning! So,
Declude would hav
I was just suggesting a method of doing what he wanted to try :)
I'm not generally a big proponent of indiscriminately adding points to
E-mail, and this one falls in the gray area. If your backup in located
at the same site, I would imagine that very few E-mails will get tagged
improperly (reb
You could write a filter that searches the headers for your backup server's IP address.
HEADERS 3 CONTAINS x.x.x.x
Matt
The problem with this is if your primary does go down (rebooting for a patch for
example), these
points will be added to *all* email until your
You could write a filter that searches the headers for your backup
server's IP address.
HEADERS 3 CONTAINS x.x.x.x
Matt
Robert Grosshandler wrote:
We do that already and it works fine. However, I know that there is a much
higher probability that any mail that passes through the b
ster
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Backup MX / Spam
Use the IPBYPASS %sec mx ip% feature within the GLOBAL.CFG file. It will
skip the ip address of your secondary mx record and run the check on the ip
address of the originati
We do that already and it works fine. However, I know that there is a much
higher probability that any mail that passes through the backup MX is spam,
so I want to add additional weight just because it comes through the backup
MX.
Rob
Jeff wrote:
>Use the IPBYPASS %sec mx ip% feature within the
] On Behalf Of Robert Grosshandler
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Backup MX / Spam
Hi
Some large percentage of the spam we get comes to the backup MX and then is
relayed to the primary MX.
Using Declude JM Standard, is there some test I
Hi
Some large percentage of the spam we get comes to the backup MX and then is
relayed to the primary MX.
Using Declude JM Standard, is there some test I can use to add additional
weight to any mail routed through my backup MX?
Thanks,
Rob
==
Robert N. Gr
14 matches
Mail list logo
