On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Matthew Byng-Maddick uttered the following:
>> Okay I see where you are coming from. And I can see there is a strong
>> possibilty of time outs etc, although I wonder if the source for spamc
>> was included into local_scan would this speed things up, I don't know,
>> only throwing the idea out.
>
> It could do. The difficulty comes with virus analysis when you have such
> files as http://colon.colondot.net/~mbm/42.zip (which you may already have
> come across).
No, I haven't seen this as yet and I grabbed a copy as I like to have
files for testing :) I also run a BBS and these help as well :)
> Ideally you want to do *some* spam processing at DATA time, but save the
> more complicated bits, and virus processing for asynchronous use. Both
> sender and receiver SMTPs should be trying to avoid duplicate mail at
> that point, the sender by having a long timeout, and the receiver by
> trying to be as quick as it can about processing the message, but
> guaranteeing that it's written to disk.
>
I suppose you could do it so that SA only does local checks first and
then rerun it afterwards to do all checks. Or you could use dcc or
similar instead.
See Ya, Sean
- --
Sean Rima http://www.tcob1.net
Linux User: 231986 Jabber: tcobone@???
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED HERE ARE NOT NECESSARILY THOSE OF MY WIFE.
