I like having specific RBLs logged. I just installed spamdyke on a few qmail-toasters yesterday (replacing rblsmtpd), and was going to as about this. Michael beat me to it! ;)
If simultaneous queries are being done, can all RBLs that match be logged? Perhaps a comma separated list within parenthesis. This would make it possible to gather stats on the effectiveness of the RBLs being used. Sam Clippinger wrote: > Yes, this is certainly possible. Right now spamdyke identifies the RBL > in its message to the remote server but not in the logs. Good idea! > > What would be a good way to log this information (preferably without > breaking existing scripts)? I'm thinking as I type here, but spamdyke > already follows the rejection reason with parenthesis (when the log > level is high enough) to indicate which file/line matched for file-based > filters... perhaps the same could be done for RBLs/RHSBLs. Something > like this: > DENIED_RBL_MATCH(rbl.example.com) > > As for reordering the RBLs to put the often-matched ones first, the next > version of spamdyke will make that less necessary. By default, it will > query all RBLs simultaneously, regardless of their order. (That > behavior can be prevented with a new flag -- ordering would be important > in that case.) > > -- Sam Clippinger > > Michael Colvin wrote: >>> To find real numbers, you would have to consider how many >>> connections are accepted, how many are rejected and for what >>> reasons. Then look at the popularity of different spamdyke >>> features and specifically the popularity of different DNS >>> RBLs. Use all that to find out what percentage of rejected >>> connections could avoid the DNS queries due to local tests. >> Along those lines, is it possible, or can it be possible, to have spamdyke's >> logs indicate which DNS RBL caused a message to be rejected? I'm assuming >> that once a reason for rejection is found, IE, the IP is listed in a >> particular RBL, further tests against other RBL's in the list are not >> performed? Knowing, statistically, which ones have a higher rejection rate, >> and queuing those first in the list of RBLS might save some time. >> >> Or course, multiple RBLS could reject the same message, and the one first in >> line would have the higher percentage, but this would give us a way to move >> them around and check the results... >> >> Just a thought from a newbie to spamdyke. >> >> BTW, I LOVE Spamdyke! What a difference it has made in my system's ability >> to filter spam and save resources! It's a God send! >> >> Mike >> -- -Eric 'shubes' _______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
