Thanks for the reply Theo. > From: Theo Van Dinter > Sent: Sunday, 4 July 2004 2:30 p.m.
> > On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 02:09:31PM +1200, Scott Truman wrote: > > I was wondering if there was any option to skip the "net" tests > > (RBLs, DCC etc) if the email was scored as spam sufficiently by the > > local tests? If there is not, would this be considered a > good option for > > Nope. There is no short-cutting code at all right now. > > > enough to score an email over a certain threshold, say 15, > then any net > > tests are basically a waste of time and resources IMO. > "net" tests with > > I was actually chatting with another developer in IM about this very > idea last night. It sounds like a good idea, except, that it's more > efficient to launch the RBL tests in the background at the start, then > run the local tests, then check the network test results. > > The likelihood is that you'll have to do network checks on > more of your > mail than the amount the short cut would be used on, so you're likely > to end up spending more time per message since you'll always > be waiting > to start the network checks. OK. I didn't realise the net tests ran in parallel with the local tests - makes good sense. This would be an issue for high throughput mail servers I guess - however, a second or 2 more would not bother the servers I have spamassassin on. My thought direction was that it would lessen the load on the RBL servers on the net, and would mean less traffic for the client's servers (if charged by MB). Out of interest, how many checks and how much traffic is created by the net checks in SA2.63 and SA3.0 by default (with say two received headers and 1 URI)? SA3.0 will introduce more I guess, with the introduction of SURBL (the bitwise multi.surbl.org will help though). > > Also, am I correct in thinking that net tests with a score > of 0.0 are > > not run at all? > > Right. Any test with a 0 score is not run. Thanks. > Randomly Generated Tagline: > "And the next time you consider complaining that running Lucid Emacs > 19.05 via NFS from a remote Linux machine in Paraguay doesn't seem to > get the background colors right, you'll know who to thank." > (By Matt Welsh) Am I dumb if I don't get that? :( Thanks again. Cheers Scott
