On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Fred wrote:
> Mike Jackson wrote:
> > Sorry for something that's off-topic, but this is the only list I
> > read :)
>
> Setting up a secondary MX server means having a second box, not creating a
> second instance on the same server. If you have a hardware failure or
> someone unplugs the ethernet by mistake, you will not receive any mail.
Mike is looking for a 'virtual secondary MX server' to test the theory
that spammers target secondary MXs, not for hardware fall-back.
So having a second instance of sendmail on the same box will work for
this (provided that he assigns it a different IP address).
As another poster stated, use DaemonPortOptions to set the listen-on
addresses. Note that you'll have to set it in -both- the primary and
the secondary configs to restrict each one to it's respecitve interfaces.
Make sure that the primary grabs the real network IP & the loop-back
addr.
> It's probably a bad idea to automatically feed anything into sa-learn.
[snip..]
I agree with this whole-heartedly. It's pretty trivial to set up a
'program' mailer delivery agent to take all mail matching a particular
criteria and feed it into a program such as "sa-learn --spam" but
without human verification you're setting yourself up for a fall.
What if your primary daemon got choked up or died for -any- reason?
(program bugs do happen ;). Then everybody in the world would feed
their messages to your secondary MX and it would all get learned as
spam. ;(
What you could do would be to set up your virtual secondary MX, feed
it thru SA in the normal method, create a SA rule that would look for
the secondary MX's address in the headers and add a few points to
the score as a more-probable spam. (or add a header that could be
used to route the messages into a 'holding bin' to be manually looked
over).
--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu> College of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
