Bump. :) Gary, please share how you do this! Thanks!
> > > How do you (make and) balance the calls to the AV servers? How do you
> > > (make
> > > and) balance the calls to the spamd machines? I am very interested in
> > > these
> > > details!
> >
> > We just call them in order case on the c
> >
> > How do you (make and) balance the calls to the AV servers? How do you
> > (make
> > and) balance the calls to the spamd machines? I am very interested in
> > these
> > details!
>
> We just call them in order case on the connection line. On two of the 4
> SMTP gateways we use node 1 as
>
> How do you (make and) balance the calls to the AV servers? How do you
> (make
> and) balance the calls to the spamd machines? I am very interested in
> these
> details!
We just call them in order case on the connection line. On two of the 4
SMTP gateways we use node 1 as the primary and
-Original Message-
> > From: email builder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:19 PM
> > To: Jason Frisvold
> > Cc: Gary W. Smith; users@spamassassin.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Load balancing spamd
> >
> >
> >
>
--- Charles Sprickman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, email builder wrote:
>
> > Technically, this should be feasible with just plain DNS load balancing,
> but
> > in our current medium/low budget scenario, we don't have the rackspace to
> > have numerous boxes that are dedicat
, August 02, 2005 5:19 PM
> To: Jason Frisvold
> Cc: Gary W. Smith; users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Load balancing spamd
>
>
>
> --- Jason Frisvold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 8/1/05, email builder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
&g
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, email builder wrote:
Technically, this should be feasible with just plain DNS load balancing, but
in our current medium/low budget scenario, we don't have the rackspace to
have numerous boxes that are dedicated ONLY to SA/clam, thus our desire is to
figure out a way to *WEIGH
--- Jason Frisvold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/1/05, email builder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Even if I had forgotten the -A, I think I would have been seeing
> connection
> > refused notices, but right now, it just seems to time out. I'm pretty
> sure
> > this is a LVS question more
On 8/1/05, email builder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Even if I had forgotten the -A, I think I would have been seeing connection
> refused notices, but right now, it just seems to time out. I'm pretty sure
> this is a LVS question more than a spamc/d question, since I've no problems
> with the la
> Do you happen to have any firewall rules in place on the LVS instance?
> Have you specified which IP's are allowed to access the instance?
As best I can tell, we have no firewall restrictions blocking intranet
packets at all.
> Both of the above are what I ran into on the default RH build (ev
Do you happen to have any firewall rules in place on the LVS instance?
Have you specified which IP's are allowed to access the instance?
Both of the above are what I ran into on the default RH build (even
though I don't run LVS).
spamd -s local5 -d -c -m10 -H -A 10.0.8.0/21
I believe without the
11 matches
Mail list logo
