Re: Is it possible to use SURBL without enabling all network tests?

[DNI Support Department <su...@dynamicnet.net>]

Greetings Martin:

We have rbldnsd running of a private IP with BIND/DNS forwarding calls to 
the various SURBL lists to that name server.  We are approved to rsync the 
data from surbl; and that's been working well.

Our primary mail server is on a physical server running several network 
applications besides mail; we will be moving it to its own physical server 
in a few months; hopefully then we can match your under 2 second benchmark.

On a side note, we are a paid spamcop.net subscriber; and we do report all 
spam to spamcop (under 8 hour average reporting time); so we do what we can 
to prevent spam in the first place.

Thank you.

At 12:57 PM 3/11/2005, you wrote:
>Are you running a caching name server locally on the machine? This helps 
>alot in reducing the DNS traffic for RBLs and URI RBL's.
>
>I normally process emails in under 2 seconds using couple of RBL's, pyzor 
>and all of the subl.org URI lookups.
>
>--
>Martin Hepworth
>Snr Systems Administrator
>Solid State Logic
>Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300

________________________________________________
Peter M. Abraham
Support and Customer Care Department
Dynamic Net, Inc.
Helping companies do business on the Net
420 Park Road; Suite 201
Wyomissing  PA  19610
Toll Free Voice:	1-888-887-6727
International:		1-610-736-3795
FAX:			1-610-736-3798
Support Email:		support@dynamicnet.net
Company Email:	solutions@dynamicnet.net
Web:			http://www.dynamicnet.net/
			http://www.wemanageservers.com/
________________________________________________

Re: Is it possible to use SURBL without enabling all network tests?

[Jeff Chan <je...@surbl.org>]

On Friday, March 11, 2005, 11:31:34 AM, DNI Department wrote:
> We have rbldnsd running of a private IP with BIND/DNS forwarding calls to
> the various SURBL lists to that name server.  We are approved to rsync the 
> data from surbl; and that's been working well.

> Our primary mail server is on a physical server running several network 
> applications besides mail; we will be moving it to its own physical server 
> in a few months; hopefully then we can match your under 2 second benchmark.

Sounds good.  :-)

> On a side note, we are a paid spamcop.net subscriber; and we do report all 
> spam to spamcop (under 8 hour average reporting time); so we do what we can 
> to prevent spam in the first place.

Definitely use SpamCop.  SpamCop reports go into their RBL, and
the spamvertised sites detected in spam message body URIs go into
sc.surbl.org, where they're highly effective at detecting future
pam.

I would definitely encourage everyone to use SpamCop.

Jeff C.
-- 
Jeff Chan
mailto:jeffc@surbl.org
http://www.surbl.org/