Re: [Opencomputing-openprotect] E-mail hammering

2004-05-21 Thread K.M.Ganesh
I would agree, 80k is way too much for resent e-mails and our Mdaemon server simply can't handle it as Linux is able to delivery much more efficiently. However, that being said, I believe that the default install of Open Protect uses Sendmail. Our Open protect server is a default install of RH8 an

RE: [Opencomputing-openprotect] E-mail hammering

2004-05-21 Thread Scott Heisler
EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 6:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Opencomputing-openprotect] E-mail hammering > Which MTA - I'm seeing this occasionally with qmail - I don't think the > openprotect filename algorithm is correct - it does not follow the DJB > wa

Re: [Opencomputing-openprotect] E-mail hammering

2004-05-21 Thread S Karthikeyan
Dear Clive, Scott Heisler wrote: We use an open protect e-mail server as the gate for our e-mail. Inside, we use product called Mdaemon. It's been in place for many years and provides good internal as well as external e-mail for us. Anyway, the reason I'm writing this is because the openprotec

Re: [Opencomputing-openprotect] E-mail hammering

2004-05-21 Thread K.M.Ganesh
Which MTA - I'm seeing this occasionally with qmail - I don't think the openprotect filename algorithm is correct - it does not follow the DJB way - but I can't prove it yet :-) Hmm, there is nothing wrong in the file name algo of qmail.pm of MailScanner, the reason DJBs way cant be followed is

Re: [Opencomputing-openprotect] E-mail hammering

2004-05-21 Thread Clive Eisen
Scott Heisler wrote: We use an open protect e-mail server as the gate for our e-mail. Inside, we use product called Mdaemon. It's been in place for many years and provides good internal as well as external e-mail for us. Anyway, the reason I'm writing this is because the openprotect server keeps