R: Spamassassin Timeout issue.
Alex Neuman van der Hans
alex at rtpty.com
Wed Sep 10 18:51:08 IST 2008
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 10, 2008, at 12:28 PM, "Kevin Miller" <Kevin_Miller at ci.juneau.ak.us
> Alex Neuman van der Hans wrote:
>> Would resolving direct be faster than resolving through opendns?
> Depends. If opendns already has that entry cached, then it's one stop
> shopping. If it's a new query, the it would be marginally faster for
> you to hit the root servers yourself and recurse through the DNS tree.
> Remember too, that once your server gets a reply for somedomain.com,
> that it will be cached locally so there won't be any further remote
> lookups for it. At least until it expires.
> Personally, I don't think it is a significant difference either way.
> If, however, you're running an older version of bind or other DNS
> that doesn't do random ports, and you don't have the luxury of
> in the immediate future, using opendns as a forwarder will add a layer
> of protection...
Hadn't thought of that one. Excellent point.
> Kevin Miller Registered Linux User No: 307357
> CBJ MIS Dept. Network Systems Admin., Mail Admin.
> 155 South Seward Street ph: (907) 586-0242
> Juneau, Alaska 99801 fax: (907 586-4500
> MailScanner mailing list
> mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
> Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
More information about the MailScanner