[Mimedefang] MIMEDefang 2.59-BETA-2 is Available

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, MIMEDefang 2.59-BETA-2 is available at http://www.mimedefang.org/node.php?id=1 This release includes a spiffy new tool for monitoring a cluster of MIMEDefang machines. Man page is man watch-multiple-mimedefangs and since we all love

[Mimedefang] Strange tempfails

Group, Below I have pasted log entries demonstrating some unexplainable tempfails I've been seeing in the last couple days. I've tallied about a dozen different senders to whom this has happened, but there seems to be one sending domain in particular, that is getting hit by this when they try to

[Mimedefang] Re: Problem on attachment name

Any hint ? Is it a mimedefang/MIME handling bug ? Or is it Apple Mail break some specification ? Please help! Thank you. Il giorno 10/gen/07, alle ore 13:25, Ing. Andrea Vettori ha scritto: Hi, I've a problem with mimedefang (version 2.58) with SpamAssassin 3 and f-secure antivirus on

[Mimedefang] Re: OT: New Attack/Poor SPAMming programming?

HI. Here is a great article about sendmail time-outs (and other antispam tricks such as greet pause): http://www.acme.com/mail_filtering/sendmail_config_frameset.html Highly recommended for any sendmail admin. Yizhar Hurwitz http://yizhar.mvps.org

Re: [Mimedefang] Re: OT: New Attack/Poor SPAMming programming?

Yizhar Hurwitz wrote: Here is a great article about sendmail time-outs (and other antispam tricks such as greet pause): http://www.acme.com/mail_filtering/sendmail_config_frameset.html Thanks for the link, My original email asked if anyone else was seeing this... not so much as what can

[Mimedefang] accept() returned invalid socket (Numerical result out of range), try again

I am running Mimedefang 2.58 with sendmail-8.12.1-2. I constatly have 500+ connections, but most of them are dropped by relaying denied and real time black lists. Out of these 500 connections, only about 10 of them actually make it through and continue on to Mimedefang. What does this error

Re: [Mimedefang] accept() returned invalid socket (Numerical result out of range), try again

Robert Jackson wrote: What does this error mean? It means that the accept() system call in libmilter is returning a file descriptor greater than or equal to FD_SETSIZE. There! :-) What it actually means is that there are too many milter threads running for libmilter to work. You might be

RE: [Mimedefang] Strange tempfails

I have cranked up the confMILTER_LOG_LEVEL to 17, hoping MIMEDefang would give me a little more data regarding the tempfails it is generating, but doing so doesn't yield anything especially useful (see additional log entries below). Since MIMEDefang's increased loglevel isnt very telling, I'll

RE: [Mimedefang] Strange tempfails

Since MIMEDefang's increased loglevel isnt very telling, I'll try cranking sendmail's loglevel. If that doesn't do it, I'll md_syslog and md_graphdefang_log my filter like crazy, to at least see what function is bailing. :/ Using md_graphdefang_log sounds good. What's the timeout in the

RE: [Mimedefang] accept() returned invalid socket (Numerical resultout of range), try again

I am not sure I understand how the milter is called. Most of these 500 connections don't get passed the blacklist checks I have included in the sendmail config. Only maybe 10 or so do. How can 10 milter connections cause this, or are the connections still made even though they are denied. -Rob

RE: [Mimedefang] accept() returned invalid socket (Numerical resultoutof range), try again

Not sure where I would make the changes from call() to select(), but I did recompile sendmail with in increased number of FD_SETSIZE. Chanaged from 256 to 512. Didn't really help. Right now there 3 servers in the pool, and I have to keep the connection limit to 325 or less. Even if each is