Why is MS doing spam checks first?

[Kai Schaetzl]

    [ The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set. ]
    [ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set.  ]
    [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]

Remco Barendse wrote on         Fri, 2 Dec 2005 18:56:41 +0100:

> Unfortunately, in my case I also have batched SMTP from my provider. This 
> means that any mail that is not deliverable directly to one of the mail 
> servers, it is queued by my provider. 

You mean, the mail is delivered from your ISP to you instead of directly? If 
you have a static IP and connected 24/7 to the net I'd change this. Obviously 
you are better off if you can just reject all those viruses instead of taking 
them from your ISP.

> Right now one box (an Athlon XP2600 with 1 Gb of ram and max 2 MailScanner 
> threads) is getting hammered with virii. It's taking up to 10K virus mails 
> per day now (normal volume is 100-200 mails per day on that 2nd in 
> line box).

You need more than 2 MailScanner processes for this, go to 5 or more. Your 
RAM is enough for that unless something else is hogging memory.
If you can't get mail to you directly the only choice you have is to avoid 
processing as much as possible. F.i. if many viruses go to non-existent 
addresses because of catch-alls remove the catch-alls. Drop sa scanning for 
the time being. And complain to your upstream ISP.

Kai

-- 
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
IE-Center: http://ie5.de & http://msie.winware.org

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the Wiki (http://wiki.mailscanner.info/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!