Please update to sa_filter2 or ba_filter. The original sa_filter misses =
some
mails when spamd is too busy.
http://xmail.marketmix.com/downloads/sa_filter2.zip
http://xmail.beaucox.com/
--Harald
> -Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-
> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftr
> You must have missed earlier messages of Davide then. You should
> upgrade your glibc library on that machine.
glibc-2.2.4-13
glibc-common-2.2.4-13
glibc-devel-2.2.4-13
gcc-2.96-98
--
Mit freundlichem Gruß
Sönke Ruempler
Technik
top concepts Internetmarketing GmbH
Am Steinkamp 7 - D-216
Sönke Ruempler wrote:
>>>Memchecker runs now on the main server. I'll let it run until RSS is
>>>40MB.
>>
>>And then upgrade the server :-)
>
>
> The problem is that if RSS goes over X, the system just kills XMail process,
> no matter if you have 40 MB or GB RAM :/
>
You must have missed earli
>> Memchecker runs now on the main server. I'll let it run until RSS is
>> 40MB.
>
> And then upgrade the server :-)
The problem is that if RSS goes over X, the system just kills XMail process,
no matter if you have 40 MB or GB RAM :/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xm
Toby Reiter pravi:
> All,
> I find that mail that gets relayed through my backup MX does not
> always get caught by SpamAssassin. Does anyone have a similar
> experience? Does anyone have any hints about why this might happen?
> I'm using the Drake's SA_Filter, which works absolutely beautifully
All,
I find that mail that gets relayed through my backup MX does not
always get caught by SpamAssassin. Does anyone have a similar
experience? Does anyone have any hints about why this might happen?
I'm using the Drake's SA_Filter, which works absolutely beautifully
in all respects. I guess I
Sönke Ruempler wrote:
>>Ran the mem debug version here for several day and no leaks were
>>detected!
>
>
> Memchecker runs now on the main server. I'll let it run until RSS is 40MB.
And then upgrade the server :-)
--
Groeten,
Peter
This message will self-destruct in 10 seconds...
-
- Heb
> Ran the mem debug version here for several day and no leaks were
> detected!
Memchecker runs now on the main server. I'll let it run until RSS is 40MB.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For general help: send the lin
Sönke Ruempler wrote:
>>I am looking into making a patch to integrate my leak-tracer in
>>XMail. It= =20
>>worked better than valgrind yesterday :-/
>
>
> That would be great since my XMail installations are still leaking (41MB RSS
> now on main server, running since 2004-05-31)
Ran the mem deb
That worked out great after a little troubleshooting. I couldnt get it to
work at first and then I noticed that the mailproc.tab that was included in
the package had a mistake in it. It had @@RFROM instead of @@FROM. This
didnt work on my setup (xmail 1.17 win2k) untill I changed it to @@FROM.
---
Perhaps you could be more precise in providing info about your problem.
I mean you have not shown any configs, logs, etc.
So far you have said, my slashes are missing - from what, in what context,
is it a filter, show the filter & filter tab files.
That's like saying my wheels are missing , can yo
Davide Libenzi wrote:
is it possible to filter out RCPT TO lines in a SMTP filter (if there are
more then one lines) so that I can change the recipient list?
>>>Yes. I need to check what happens if you leave the list empty though ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Is any modi
If SmartDNSHost solved your problem then you probably have a firewall
that stops your Xmail DNS queryies.
Matic
>Our delayed delivery problems were (probably) solved with SmartDNSHost
>setting.
>
>However, I lost whole day with that :-(((
>
>I assume that if SmartDNSHost is not set, XMAIL tries
Jan Rovner wrote:
> Our delayed delivery problems were (probably) solved with SmartDNSHost
> setting.
>
> However, I lost whole day with that :-(((
c'mon look at the bright side! `:)
--
alex
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL P
At 11:07 6/3/2004, you wrote:
>Our delayed delivery problems were (probably) solved with SmartDNSHost
>setting.
>
>However, I lost whole day with that :-(((
>
>I assume that if SmartDNSHost is not set, XMAIL tries to resolve DNS
>queries by its own DNS resolver.=20
>
>My DNSROOTS file (after decom
I don't mind blocking an address which is sending out viruses since
sober.g flooded my net with thousands of viruses a day. If this list is
working I will be using it.
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Namens Leonardo Cabral
Verzonden: donderdag 3 ju
Our delayed delivery problems were (probably) solved with SmartDNSHost
setting.
However, I lost whole day with that :-(((
I assume that if SmartDNSHost is not set, XMAIL tries to resolve DNS
queries by its own DNS resolver.=20
My DNSROOTS file (after decompresing .zip distro) contains only that:
What do I have to put in the slash? Could you be more precise?
Thanks, Bogdan Petrica.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Chris L. Franklin
> Sent: 1 iunie 2004 19:12
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [xmail] Re: Mail filtering
>
> yo
we have a big world with millions of internet users, no? well, here in
argentina thats very common. The isp gives an internet access and each
company uses it as it likes, for example, giving his lan internet access via
a router/linux doing nat/pat.
we don't must loose the point that there are thous
Thank you very much for
your support, it seems to be working now.
I'll check it and tell you whether the problem was
solved.
Bye,
Jan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Davide Libenzi
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 3:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTE
Actually some ISP's like xs4all in the Netherlands will block a company
network because of that
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Namens chabral
Verzonden: donderdag 3 juni 2004 14:58
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: [xmail] Re: virus database
they
Davide Libenzi wrote:
>>
>>I want to move the XMail directory from one drive to another (Same path,
>>though, just different drive letter). What changes should I make?
>>
>>I was thinking Services, registry (MAILROOT and commandline) and
>>possibly any filters I have installed. Anything I missed?
I have a filter that runs XAV, both in fiters.in and filters.out.
The line in the filters.*.tab is:
"*""*""0.0.0.0/0""0.0.0.0/0""av.tab"
(Yes, real tabs, don't worry.)
av.tab says:
"c:\xav\xav.exe""c:\xav""@@FILE""@@FROM""@@RCPT""20"
But still xav.log shows me
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Liron Newman wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I want to move the XMail directory from one drive to another (Same path,
> though, just different drive letter). What changes should I make?
>
> I was thinking Services, registry (MAILROOT and commandline) and
> possibly any filters I have
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Jan Rovner wrote:
> Hello,
> =20
> I'm experiencing big problems with XMAIL 1.20 on Windows. Emails are
> delivered
> with big delay (20 minutes - 2 hours). Usual load of our server is about
> 50.000 emails
> per day. With old SMTP server, e-mails were delivered within a minute
At 09:36 6/3/2004, you wrote:
>To bring this to the realm of spam rather than viruses, I have some
>of the RDNS blocking set up through SpamAssassin. I've noticed that
>this sometimes creates false positives for mail that originated on a
>dynamic DSL address, and then was relayed through that users
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, [iso-8859-1] S=F6nke Ruempler wrote:
> > I am looking into making a patch to integrate my leak-tracer in
> > XMail. It=3D =3D20
> > worked better than valgrind yesterday :-/
>=20
> That would be great since my XMail installations are still leaking (41MB =
RSS
> now on main serv
To bring this to the realm of spam rather than viruses, I have some
of the RDNS blocking set up through SpamAssassin. I've noticed that
this sometimes creates false positives for mail that originated on a
dynamic DSL address, and then was relayed through that users ISP.
Would this same problem
Hello,
=20
I'm experiencing big problems with XMAIL 1.20 on Windows. Emails are
delivered
with big delay (20 minutes - 2 hours). Usual load of our server is about
50.000 emails
per day. With old SMTP server, e-mails were delivered within a minute
:-(
=20
XMail Queue manager shows many messages in t
Hey all,
I want to move the XMail directory from one drive to another (Same path,
though, just different drive letter). What changes should I make?
I was thinking Services, registry (MAILROOT and commandline) and
possibly any filters I have installed. Anything I missed?
-
To unsubscribe from th
they can also be pc's on a corporate network going out to the internet by a
server o firewall doing nat/pat, so it will be blocking some corporations
too.
chabral
alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Servitel srl - Roberto Pavesi wrote:
>
>> This is a CRAZY idea !
>> In a few time you have banned 50
alex wrote:
>>they clean their system, what then? Who would unlist them?
>>
>>
>
>you clearly didn't read the webpage, the ip addresses are listed only for
>24hours.
>
>
>
That's right, I didn't.. :)) Good to know they thought of that!
>>I'm using XAV with F-Prot on my server and the only
At 08:43 6/3/2004, you wrote:
> > as "adsl-99-25-74-211.dsl.blvloh.ameritech.net"). Since these kinds of
> > machines are 1) not intended to deliver mail, and 2) prohibited by their
> > ISP's Terms Of Service or Acceptable Use Policies from running mail
> > servers, there is no reason not to block
At 08:38 6/3/2004, you wrote:
>I think this is useless at best and harmful at worst. These are not
>spammers or spammers' ISPs.. These are innocent users. What would you
>get by blocking them? Nothing, there would be a zillion other infected
>ones. Plus, get an AV filter for your server instead, yo
Tracy wrote:
> At 08:22 6/3/2004, you wrote:
>
>
>>This is a CRAZY idea !
>>In a few time you have banned 50% or more of internet traffic !
>>alex wrote:
>
>
>
> It's actually not a crazy idea, because a very large percentage of the
> virus traffic on the Internet originates from end-user bo
Servitel srl - Roberto Pavesi wrote:
> This is a CRAZY idea !
> In a few time you have banned 50% or more of internet traffic !
> alex wrote:
>
>
>>more info: http://virbl.bit.nl/
>>
the internettraffic you're talking about are home pc's sending viruses not
mailservers. isp mailserver are whit
Liron Newman wrote:
> alex wrote:
>
>
>>I don't know if this is offtopic, in that case: i'm sorry :)
>>
>>bit.nl (a dutch provider) started to put ip-addresses from emailing
>>virusinfected computers in a database. I thought this might be useful for
>>people fighting spam :)
>>
>>more info: ht
At 08:22 6/3/2004, you wrote:
>This is a CRAZY idea !
>In a few time you have banned 50% or more of internet traffic !
>alex wrote:
It's actually not a crazy idea, because a very large percentage of the
virus traffic on the Internet originates from end-user boxes (machines that
were never inte
This is a CRAZY idea !
In a few time you have banned 50% or more of internet traffic !
alex wrote:
>more info: http://virbl.bit.nl/
>
>
>
--
---
SMS ad alta velocità via web: http://www.gatewaysms.it
-
alex wrote:
>I don't know if this is offtopic, in that case: i'm sorry :)
>
>bit.nl (a dutch provider) started to put ip-addresses from emailing
>virusinfected computers in a database. I thought this might be useful for
>people fighting spam :)
>
>more info: http://virbl.bit.nl/
>
>
>
I think
Hi all,
I don't know if this is offtopic, in that case: i'm sorry :)
bit.nl (a dutch provider) started to put ip-addresses from emailing
virusinfected computers in a database. I thought this might be useful for
people fighting spam :)
more info: http://virbl.bit.nl/
--
alex
-
To unsubscribe
Hello,
I've put XMAIL 1.20 (Windows) onto our server. Everything works fine,
but mails are delivered info mailboxes after a long period of time (or
even are not delivered at all)?
I've found that incoming messages are not lost - but instead of=20
delivering are laying in spool\xx\xxx\mess directo
> I am looking into making a patch to integrate my leak-tracer in
> XMail. It= =20
> worked better than valgrind yesterday :-/
That would be great since my XMail installations are still leaking (41MB RSS
now on main server, running since 2004-05-31)
--
Sönke
-
To unsubscribe from this list: se
Making sure I wasn't dillusional :) Thanks Davide.
-Mike
- Original Message -
From: "Davide Libenzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 5:56 PM
Subject: [xmail] Re: 1.20 aliasdomainlist bug?
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Mike Harrington wrote:
>
> > Dav
44 matches
Mail list logo
