assp-user

Re: [Assp-user] Question regarding no processing

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

Ah sorry.  As I understand it, the no processing regex, like the
redlist regex, applies to inbound and outbound mail.

The redlist functions are used to prevent pollution of the whitelist
as well as the notspam corpus.  No-processing matches pass through
completely with "no processing" of any sort.


On 7/27/05, Dave Beckstrom <db...@at...> wrote:
> Micheal,
>=20
> Thanks, but regex wasn't really my question.  My question had more to do
> with the function of "no processing" and if it applies to only inbound ma=
il,
> outbound mail or both.  The docs are very vague.  Also, does a match mean=
 it
> doesn't contribute to the spam corpus?
>=20
> I'm looking for an overall explanation of this feature and examples of ho=
w
> it's typically used.
>=20
> I understand the redlist applies to whether or not something contributes =
to
> the whitelist.
>=20
> But the "no processing" option is virtually undocumented based on the
> description I read.  It needs to explain if its two way and what it effec=
ts
> such as if something is stored in the spam/notspam corpuses.
>=20
> I have my assumption of how I THINK it should work but some clarification=
 is
> always better than an assumption!!!!
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ass...@li... [mailto:assp-user-
> > ad...@li...] On Behalf Of Micheal Espinola Jr
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 1:55 PM
> > To: ass...@li...
> > Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Question regarding no processing
> >
> > A more exact match for the ASSP list in the mail header would be:
> >
> > subject\:.?[Assp-user]
> >
> > As for matching your reply string, this might be more complicated.
> > Not all email programs reply with the same string.  While a vast
> > majorty will prepend "Re:" in the subject, not all do it like that.  I
> > would try something liike:
> >
> > subject\:*a powerquote from
> >
> >
> >
> > On 7/27/05, Dave Beckstrom <db...@at...> wrote:
> > > I'm just starting to get my head around some of the features in ASSP =
and
> > I
> > > have a "best practices" type of question for you more experienced ASS=
P
> > > users.
> > >
> > > This email list, for example, always has the text [Assp-user] in the
> > subject
> > > line.  It's very unlikely I would ever receive SPAM email with that s=
ame
> > > text string in the subject.
> > >
> > > Should I place the string [Assp-user] into the "Expression to Identif=
y
> > > No-processing Mail" field?
> > >
> > > For the "expression to Identify No-processing Mail" the docs say, "If=
 an
> > > email header matches this Perl regular expression it will pass throug=
h
> > > unprocessed".   What is meant by pass through?  Pass through in which
> > > direction?  Does it mean if a match occurs the email won't be scanned
> > either
> > > incoming or outgoing or just incoming?
> > >
> > > Here is something I am thinking I should probably configure.  We have=
 an
> > > application that sends out email with the string "A powerquote from" =
in
> > the
> > > subject.  ASSP doesn't ever need to process these when they are
> > outgoing.
> > > However, if someone replies I would like to make sure that if the
> > subject
> > > contains "RE: A powerquote from" that it is never flagged as spam and=
 in
> > > fact it could pass through ASSP unchecked other than a look to see if
> > the
> > > subject matches.  What is the best way to implement this?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
> > September
> > > 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
> > > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing=
 &
> > QA
> > > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement *
> > http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Assp-user mailing list
> > > Ass...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
> > September
> > 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
> > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing &=
 QA
> > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5=
sf
> > _______________________________________________
> > Assp-user mailing list
> > Ass...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO Septem=
ber
> 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & Q=
A
> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] Question regarding no processing

[otherguy <oth...@ot...>]

On Jul 27, 2005, at 12:45 PM, Dave Beckstrom wrote:

> I'm just starting to get my head around some of the features in  
> ASSP and I
> have a "best practices" type of question for you more experienced ASSP
> users.
>
> This email list, for example, always has the text [Assp-user] in  
> the subject
> line.  It's very unlikely I would ever receive SPAM email with that  
> same
> text string in the subject.
>
> Should I place the string [Assp-user] into the "Expression to Identify
> No-processing Mail" field?
>
> For the "expression to Identify No-processing Mail" the docs say,  
> "If an
> email header matches this Perl regular expression it will pass through
> unprocessed".   What is meant by pass through?  Pass through in which
> direction?  Does it mean if a match occurs the email won't be  
> scanned either
> incoming or outgoing or just incoming?
>
> Here is something I am thinking I should probably configure.  We  
> have an
> application that sends out email with the string "A powerquote  
> from" in the
> subject.  ASSP doesn't ever need to process these when they are  
> outgoing.
> However, if someone replies I would like to make sure that if the  
> subject
> contains "RE: A powerquote from" that it is never flagged as spam  
> and in
> fact it could pass through ASSP unchecked other than a look to see  
> if the
> subject matches.  What is the best way to implement this?
>


Actually, you want to process this list.

Not only does it add to the whitelist (so nothing will get marked as  
spam anyway), it also populates your good database, so if you have a  
message come through about ASSP that doesn't comes sepearate from the  
list, it'll be whitelisted, or it'll be bayesian ham.

Same thing with your powerquote messages.  The people you send to  
will be whitelisted, so everything including your DB and your  
whitelist will be properly updated.

Here's a good example of a no-processing.

Let's say that in your "rejected for spam" error, you said "add  
companyname-nospam to the subject to make sure your message gets  
through."

That would be a good example of a no processing, because the message  
coming through might look extremely spammy, so you want it to get  
through without mucking up the bayesian database.  Then, the way that  
your end users reply to the message will determine what gets  
whitelisted and whatnot.

Another good example of a no-process would be an incoming spammy- 
looking mailing list.  You want the deals from this one provider, but  
you don't want any other similar mail to get through.  In all reality  
the bayesian filter should take care of this, or a whitelist, etc,  
but there are a couple of extremely unique situations where it wouldn't.


-Cameron Wilhelm
oth...@ot...

Re: [Assp-user] Spammers whitelisted

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

That looks like mine.  I'm glad you found it useful!

I'm working on a new more complex/encompassing one right now, but I'm
having trouble with nesting regex's in parenthesis. Perhaps I am
making too complicated....

On 7/27/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> Heres a good one someone sent me just a week or so ago on this very same
> mail list!  It has been modified to suit my needs a bit - I apologize
> that I can't remember who sent it to me...
>=20
> auto-submitted\:.*?auto-replied|automated.response|autoreply|content-type=
\:.*?message\/delivery-status|content-type\:.*?multipart\/report|in-reply-t=
o\:.*?<servername|remove|report-type.*?\=3D.*?delivery-status|report-type.*=
?\=3D.*?disposition-notification|subject\:.*?delivered:|subject\:.*?deliver=
y.status|subject\:.*?undeliverable|subject\:.*out.of[the|]office|unsubscrib=
e|x-assp-spam\:.yes|x-intended-for\:.*?spa...@do...
>=20
> Jeff
>=20
> Dave Beckstrom wrote:
>=20
> >>Got anyone doing auto replies or auto forwarding?
> >>
> >>Both of those would do it.
> >>
> >>Redlist those accounts.
> >>
> >>--
> >>Bill Christensen
> >><http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>
> >>
> >
> >Oh, man, yeah I have a lot of auto forwarding set up.  This may be a sho=
w
> >stopper for me where I would have to remove ASSP unless we can find a
> >work-around.
> >
> >I have mail accounts where a message is delivered and left on the mail
> >server for the account owner to retrieve and where a copy is also forwar=
ded
> >to me for my review.
> >
> >I have accounts where everything received is forwarded to me.  Does that
> >present two problems?  One being it would auto-whitelist the spammer and=
 the
> >other being the spam forwarded to me would come from one of my local
> >accounts and thus be considered not spam?  Or is that not how forwarding
> >works.
> >
> >What about a mail account which is an alias, such as postmaster, which
> >forwards mail to the domain owner?  If its an alias is it truly forwardi=
ng
> >the mail or just dropping the original email into a different mail accou=
nt?
> >
> >Does anyone have a sample redlist rule for handling out of office replie=
s
> >and the like?
> >
> >Thanks for all of the great suggestions!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------------
> >SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> >from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dcli=
ck
> >_______________________________________________
> >Assp-user mailing list
> >Ass...@li...
> >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclic=
k
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] Spammers whitelisted

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

Below is the list I am working on now.  All of which would be one
line, delimted by |'s (pipes).

auto-submitted\:
content-type\:.?(message\/delivery-status|multipart\/report)
in-reply-to\:.?\<servername
report-type.?\=3D.?(delivery-status|disposition-notification)
subject\:.*?(automated|automatic).(reply|response)
subject\:.*?autoreply
subject\:.*?bounce
subject\:.*?delivered
subject\:.*?failure notice
subject\:.*?(mail.|)delivery.(failed|notification|status)
subject\:.*?remove
subject\:.*?returned mail
subject\:.*?un(deliverable|unsubscribe)
subject\:.*out.of(.the|).office
x-intended-for\:.?spa...@do...

I would really like to get all the lines beginning with the repeated
"subject\:.*?" to be in on nested part of the expression (which would
save on character space), but I havent been able to get it to work
properly.  I'm inexperienced with regex's, so any help would be
appreciated.


On 7/27/05, Micheal Espinola Jr <mic...@gm...> wrote:
> That looks like mine.  I'm glad you found it useful!
>=20
> I'm working on a new more complex/encompassing one right now, but I'm
> having trouble with nesting regex's in parenthesis. Perhaps I am
> making too complicated....
>=20
> On 7/27/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> > Heres a good one someone sent me just a week or so ago on this very sam=
e
> > mail list!  It has been modified to suit my needs a bit - I apologize
> > that I can't remember who sent it to me...
> >
> > auto-submitted\:.*?auto-replied|automated.response|autoreply|content-ty=
pe\:.*?message\/delivery-status|content-type\:.*?multipart\/report|in-reply=
-to\:.*?<servername|remove|report-type.*?\=3D.*?delivery-status|report-type=
.*?\=3D.*?disposition-notification|subject\:.*?delivered:|subject\:.*?deliv=
ery.status|subject\:.*?undeliverable|subject\:.*out.of[the|]office|unsubscr=
ibe|x-assp-spam\:.yes|x-intended-for\:.*?spa...@do...
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > Dave Beckstrom wrote:
> >
> > >>Got anyone doing auto replies or auto forwarding?
> > >>
> > >>Both of those would do it.
> > >>
> > >>Redlist those accounts.
> > >>
> > >>--
> > >>Bill Christensen
> > >><http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>
> > >>
> > >
> > >Oh, man, yeah I have a lot of auto forwarding set up.  This may be a s=
how
> > >stopper for me where I would have to remove ASSP unless we can find a
> > >work-around.
> > >
> > >I have mail accounts where a message is delivered and left on the mail
> > >server for the account owner to retrieve and where a copy is also forw=
arded
> > >to me for my review.
> > >
> > >I have accounts where everything received is forwarded to me.  Does th=
at
> > >present two problems?  One being it would auto-whitelist the spammer a=
nd the
> > >other being the spam forwarded to me would come from one of my local
> > >accounts and thus be considered not spam?  Or is that not how forwardi=
ng
> > >works.
> > >
> > >What about a mail account which is an alias, such as postmaster, which
> > >forwards mail to the domain owner?  If its an alias is it truly forwar=
ding
> > >the mail or just dropping the original email into a different mail acc=
ount?
> > >
> > >Does anyone have a sample redlist rule for handling out of office repl=
ies
> > >and the like?
> > >
> > >Thanks for all of the great suggestions!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-------------------------------------------------------
> > >SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> > >from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> > >informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> > >speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dc=
lick
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Assp-user mailing list
> > >Ass...@li...
> > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> > from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> > informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> > speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dcl=
ick
> > _______________________________________________
> > Assp-user mailing list
> > Ass...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >
>=20
>=20
> --
> ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] Spammers whitelisted

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

Oops:

subject\:.*?un(deliverable|unsubscribe)

should read:

subject\:.*?un(deliverable|subscribe)



On 7/27/05, Micheal Espinola Jr <mic...@gm...> wrote:
> Below is the list I am working on now.  All of which would be one
> line, delimted by |'s (pipes).
>=20
> auto-submitted\:
> content-type\:.?(message\/delivery-status|multipart\/report)
> in-reply-to\:.?\<servername
> report-type.?\=3D.?(delivery-status|disposition-notification)
> subject\:.*?(automated|automatic).(reply|response)
> subject\:.*?autoreply
> subject\:.*?bounce
> subject\:.*?delivered
> subject\:.*?failure notice
> subject\:.*?(mail.|)delivery.(failed|notification|status)
> subject\:.*?remove
> subject\:.*?returned mail
> subject\:.*?un(deliverable|unsubscribe)
> subject\:.*out.of(.the|).office
> x-intended-for\:.?spa...@do...
>=20
> I would really like to get all the lines beginning with the repeated
> "subject\:.*?" to be in on nested part of the expression (which would
> save on character space), but I havent been able to get it to work
> properly.  I'm inexperienced with regex's, so any help would be
> appreciated.
>=20
>=20
> On 7/27/05, Micheal Espinola Jr <mic...@gm...> wrote:
> > That looks like mine.  I'm glad you found it useful!
> >
> > I'm working on a new more complex/encompassing one right now, but I'm
> > having trouble with nesting regex's in parenthesis. Perhaps I am
> > making too complicated....
> >
> > On 7/27/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> > > Heres a good one someone sent me just a week or so ago on this very s=
ame
> > > mail list!  It has been modified to suit my needs a bit - I apologize
> > > that I can't remember who sent it to me...
> > >
> > > auto-submitted\:.*?auto-replied|automated.response|autoreply|content-=
type\:.*?message\/delivery-status|content-type\:.*?multipart\/report|in-rep=
ly-to\:.*?<servername|remove|report-type.*?\=3D.*?delivery-status|report-ty=
pe.*?\=3D.*?disposition-notification|subject\:.*?delivered:|subject\:.*?del=
ivery.status|subject\:.*?undeliverable|subject\:.*out.of[the|]office|unsubs=
cribe|x-assp-spam\:.yes|x-intended-for\:.*?spa...@do...
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > > Dave Beckstrom wrote:
> > >
> > > >>Got anyone doing auto replies or auto forwarding?
> > > >>
> > > >>Both of those would do it.
> > > >>
> > > >>Redlist those accounts.
> > > >>
> > > >>--
> > > >>Bill Christensen
> > > >><http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >Oh, man, yeah I have a lot of auto forwarding set up.  This may be a=
 show
> > > >stopper for me where I would have to remove ASSP unless we can find =
a
> > > >work-around.
> > > >
> > > >I have mail accounts where a message is delivered and left on the ma=
il
> > > >server for the account owner to retrieve and where a copy is also fo=
rwarded
> > > >to me for my review.
> > > >
> > > >I have accounts where everything received is forwarded to me.  Does =
that
> > > >present two problems?  One being it would auto-whitelist the spammer=
 and the
> > > >other being the spam forwarded to me would come from one of my local
> > > >accounts and thus be considered not spam?  Or is that not how forwar=
ding
> > > >works.
> > > >
> > > >What about a mail account which is an alias, such as postmaster, whi=
ch
> > > >forwards mail to the domain owner?  If its an alias is it truly forw=
arding
> > > >the mail or just dropping the original email into a different mail a=
ccount?
> > > >
> > > >Does anyone have a sample redlist rule for handling out of office re=
plies
> > > >and the like?
> > > >
> > > >Thanks for all of the great suggestions!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >-------------------------------------------------------
> > > >SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategi=
es
> > > >from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> > > >informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> > > >speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=
=3Dclick
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >Assp-user mailing list
> > > >Ass...@li...
> > > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategie=
s
> > > from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> > > informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> > > speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3D=
click
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Assp-user mailing list
> > > Ass...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>
> >
>=20
>=20
> --
> ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

One other thing I should add - I am seeing (and I have been for awhile) 
exact duplicates in "notspam" of emails - two or more.  It would make 
sense if an Exchange user was sending out an email to more than 1 user 
and they were being replicated - each email would be relegated to 
notspam individually.

There must be a way to stop that from Exchange! (I hope...)
Someone else must have run into this at some point... it seems like it 
would be a very common problem.

Also, it would be great if there were a way to prevent ASSP from 
processing mails from trusted users from a performance standpoint (other 
than to whitelist, isspam, notspam.) as mentioned earlier - this would 
also improve performance by a huge factor.  No one has really commented 
on this other than Theo who wants to process these mails 
(understandable), so I assume that at this point there is no way to 
prevent them from being processed.

Thanks again,

Jeff


Jeff Buehler wrote:

> Hi Micheal -
>
> Thanks for your input...
>
> One of my clients runs Exchange on a remote box - it sends mail via 
> Smart Host to my server running ASSP under FreeBSD.
>
> Recently, one of the users sent out mail to hundreds of users.  The 
> mail was about 500K.
>
> What I want to happen is that the mail comes in, is passed on by ASSP 
> to my MTA and then it is replicated and sent out to each of the 
> individual users in the list.  However, this is not what happened.
>
> Instead ASSP processed  each mail individually - the same mail 
> hundreds of times.  Each of these email clones was passed first to my 
> anti-virus service and then finally to my MTA where the actual 
> replication should occur, if I can control that.
>
> I am not positive that Exchange is doing the replication, although 
> Theo has said that ASSP is not doing it.  It has to be either Exchange 
> or ASSP.
>
> So my assumption at this point is that the users sends his mail, 
> Exchange then replicates it for each user on the list and sends each 
> mail clone individually to ASSP, causing a ridiculous amount of 
> performance degradation for no good reason as ASSP processes each one, 
> then my anti-spam service processes each one, then finally each one is 
> sent out via my MTA.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jeff
>
> Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>
>> I'm an Exchange admin, and I have access to some good Exchange info. 
>> Exactly what are you asking about here?  I might be able to dig up an
>> answer, but so far I'm not following what you mean by "replication".
>>
>> On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> Hi Theo -
>>>
>>> Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
>>>
>>> The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd (c/c++ app and
>>> very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA), which could
>>> handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is where the
>>> replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD (except for 
>>> the
>>> Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
>>> normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
>>> load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
>>> that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
>>> Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
>>>
>>> Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>> Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some mail server
>>>> in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
>>>> server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
>>>> server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
>>>> organization).
>>>>
>>>> As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange and whatever
>>>> it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't replicate the
>>>> emails.
>>>>
>>>> You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
>>>> proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
>>>> Destination to do the replicating.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
>>>>
>>>> I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
>>>> (what kind of server/software)?
>>>>
>>>> Theo
>>>>
>>>>    
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    *From:* ass...@li...
>>>>    [mailto:ass...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Jeff
>>>>    Buehler
>>>>    *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
>>>>    *To:* ass...@li...
>>>>    *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    Hi Theo -
>>>>
>>>>    Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user from this one
>>>>    organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
>>>>    especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
>>>>    then one of the following occurs:
>>>>
>>>>    1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange  (lets say
>>>>    there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
>>>>    100 emails)
>>>>    2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
>>>>    to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
>>>>    3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
>>>>    it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
>>>>    (clamsmtpd) service
>>>>
>>>>    Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
>>>>    which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
>>>>    backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the load average
>>>>    for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
>>>>    anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
>>>>    anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
>>>>    to scan it for each user).
>>>>
>>>>    So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
>>>>    Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
>>>>    smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be "cloned" for each
>>>>    recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
>>>>    "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
>>>>    passing all that mail on...
>>>>
>>>>    Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>    Jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
>>>>
>>>> something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
>>>>
>>>> using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
>>>>
>>>> notification to boot that something happened.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this reason.  The
>>>>
>>>> only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Theo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>
>>>>> From: ass...@li... 
>>>>> <mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>
>>>>> [mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff Buehler
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
>>>>>
>>>>> To: ass...@li... 
>>>>> <mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all -
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
>>>>>
>>>>> condensed:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
>>>>>
>>>>> allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
>>>>>
>>>>> whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
>>>>>
>>>>> prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
>>>>>
>>>>> and I don't
>>>>>
>>>>> know about it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
>>>>>
>>>>> scanned, but why when they are the sender?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>
>>>>> Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>>>
>>>>> straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>>>
>>>>> everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click 
>>>>> <http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>> Ass...@li... 
>>>>> <mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>
>>>> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click 
>>>> <http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=click>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> Assp-user mailing list
>>>>
>>>> Ass...@li... 
>>>> <mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Assp-user mailing list
>>> Ass...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>
>>>   
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

Unless you are using Exchange to smart relay, Exchange is going to
behave as an MTA.  When it gets an email in its queue, the next stop
is the local recipient or (to what it thinks is) the recipients mail
server.  With this in mind, mail is going to be sent individually per
domain.

AFAIK, if something is sent to TO: and CC: fields, as long as it is
within the same domain, it should stay as a single email.  Separate
domains should get split off.

Anything BCC'd will get sent individually.

AFAIK, there is no way to alter this behavior.  I don't know how you
could alter this behavior on any MTA.

If this is contrary to what you are seeing, I will confer with some
Exchange MVP acquaintances.


On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> One other thing I should add - I am seeing (and I have been for awhile)
> exact duplicates in "notspam" of emails - two or more.  It would make
> sense if an Exchange user was sending out an email to more than 1 user
> and they were being replicated - each email would be relegated to
> notspam individually.
>=20
> There must be a way to stop that from Exchange! (I hope...)
> Someone else must have run into this at some point... it seems like it
> would be a very common problem.
>=20
> Also, it would be great if there were a way to prevent ASSP from
> processing mails from trusted users from a performance standpoint (other
> than to whitelist, isspam, notspam.) as mentioned earlier - this would
> also improve performance by a huge factor.  No one has really commented
> on this other than Theo who wants to process these mails
> (understandable), so I assume that at this point there is no way to
> prevent them from being processed.
>=20
> Thanks again,
>=20
> Jeff
>=20
>=20
> Jeff Buehler wrote:
>=20
> > Hi Micheal -
> >
> > Thanks for your input...
> >
> > One of my clients runs Exchange on a remote box - it sends mail via
> > Smart Host to my server running ASSP under FreeBSD.
> >
> > Recently, one of the users sent out mail to hundreds of users.  The
> > mail was about 500K.
> >
> > What I want to happen is that the mail comes in, is passed on by ASSP
> > to my MTA and then it is replicated and sent out to each of the
> > individual users in the list.  However, this is not what happened.
> >
> > Instead ASSP processed  each mail individually - the same mail
> > hundreds of times.  Each of these email clones was passed first to my
> > anti-virus service and then finally to my MTA where the actual
> > replication should occur, if I can control that.
> >
> > I am not positive that Exchange is doing the replication, although
> > Theo has said that ASSP is not doing it.  It has to be either Exchange
> > or ASSP.
> >
> > So my assumption at this point is that the users sends his mail,
> > Exchange then replicates it for each user on the list and sends each
> > mail clone individually to ASSP, causing a ridiculous amount of
> > performance degradation for no good reason as ASSP processes each one,
> > then my anti-spam service processes each one, then finally each one is
> > sent out via my MTA.
> >
> > Does that make sense?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
> >
> >> I'm an Exchange admin, and I have access to some good Exchange info.
> >> Exactly what are you asking about here?  I might be able to dig up an
> >> answer, but so far I'm not following what you mean by "replication".
> >>
> >> On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi Theo -
> >>>
> >>> Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
> >>>
> >>> The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd (c/c++ app an=
d
> >>> very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA), which coul=
d
> >>> handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is where th=
e
> >>> replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD (except for
> >>> the
> >>> Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
> >>> normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
> >>> load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
> >>> that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
> >>> Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
> >>>
> >>> Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>> Jeff
> >>>
> >>> Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some mail serve=
r
> >>>> in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
> >>>> server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
> >>>> server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
> >>>> organization).
> >>>>
> >>>> As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange and whateve=
r
> >>>> it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't replicate th=
e
> >>>> emails.
> >>>>
> >>>> You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
> >>>> proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
> >>>> Destination to do the replicating.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
> >>>>
> >>>> I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
> >>>> (what kind of server/software)?
> >>>>
> >>>> Theo
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------=
----
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    *From:* ass...@li...
> >>>>    [mailto:ass...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Jef=
f
> >>>>    Buehler
> >>>>    *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
> >>>>    *To:* ass...@li...
> >>>>    *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    Hi Theo -
> >>>>
> >>>>    Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user from this on=
e
> >>>>    organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
> >>>>    especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
> >>>>    then one of the following occurs:
> >>>>
> >>>>    1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange  (lets say
> >>>>    there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
> >>>>    100 emails)
> >>>>    2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
> >>>>    to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
> >>>>    3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
> >>>>    it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
> >>>>    (clamsmtpd) service
> >>>>
> >>>>    Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
> >>>>    which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
> >>>>    backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the load average
> >>>>    for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
> >>>>    anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
> >>>>    anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
> >>>>    to scan it for each user).
> >>>>
> >>>>    So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
> >>>>    Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
> >>>>    smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be "cloned" for each
> >>>>    recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
> >>>>    "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
> >>>>    passing all that mail on...
> >>>>
> >>>>    Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>>    Jeff
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
> >>>>
> >>>> something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagat=
e
> >>>>
> >>>> using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
> >>>>
> >>>> notification to boot that something happened.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this reason.  T=
he
> >>>>
> >>>> only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Theo
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: ass...@li...
> >>>>> <mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jeff Buehler
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
> >>>>>
> >>>>> To: ass...@li...
> >>>>> <mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi all -
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
> >>>>>
> >>>>> condensed:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
> >>>>>
> >>>>> allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
> >>>>>
> >>>>> whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
> >>>>>
> >>>>> prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and I don't
> >>>>>
> >>>>> know about it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
> >>>>>
> >>>>> scanned, but why when they are the sender?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jeff
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> >>>>>
> >>>>> everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> >>>>> <http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ass...@li...
> >>>>> <mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategi=
es
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>>>
> >>>> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=3Dclick
> >>>> <http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>> Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>
> >>>> Ass...@li...
> >>>> <mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>>>
> >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -------------------------------------------------------
> >>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategie=
s
> >>> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3D=
click
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Assp-user mailing list
> >>> Ass...@li...
> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> > from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> > informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> > speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dcl=
ick
> > _______________________________________________
> > Assp-user mailing list
> > Ass...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclic=
k
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

I suppose that makes sense - I know of no way to do it using XMail, 
Postfix, or Sendmail (that doesn't mean it can't be done in any of those 
MTA's, though!).  It seems like an important feature in this particular 
instance.

Jeff

Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:

>Unless you are using Exchange to smart relay, Exchange is going to
>behave as an MTA.  When it gets an email in its queue, the next stop
>is the local recipient or (to what it thinks is) the recipients mail
>server.  With this in mind, mail is going to be sent individually per
>domain.
>
>AFAIK, if something is sent to TO: and CC: fields, as long as it is
>within the same domain, it should stay as a single email.  Separate
>domains should get split off.
>
>Anything BCC'd will get sent individually.
>
>AFAIK, there is no way to alter this behavior.  I don't know how you
>could alter this behavior on any MTA.
>
>If this is contrary to what you are seeing, I will confer with some
>Exchange MVP acquaintances.
>
>
>On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
>  
>
>>One other thing I should add - I am seeing (and I have been for awhile)
>>exact duplicates in "notspam" of emails - two or more.  It would make
>>sense if an Exchange user was sending out an email to more than 1 user
>>and they were being replicated - each email would be relegated to
>>notspam individually.
>>
>>There must be a way to stop that from Exchange! (I hope...)
>>Someone else must have run into this at some point... it seems like it
>>would be a very common problem.
>>
>>Also, it would be great if there were a way to prevent ASSP from
>>processing mails from trusted users from a performance standpoint (other
>>than to whitelist, isspam, notspam.) as mentioned earlier - this would
>>also improve performance by a huge factor.  No one has really commented
>>on this other than Theo who wants to process these mails
>>(understandable), so I assume that at this point there is no way to
>>prevent them from being processed.
>>
>>Thanks again,
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>
>>Jeff Buehler wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi Micheal -
>>>
>>>Thanks for your input...
>>>
>>>One of my clients runs Exchange on a remote box - it sends mail via
>>>Smart Host to my server running ASSP under FreeBSD.
>>>
>>>Recently, one of the users sent out mail to hundreds of users.  The
>>>mail was about 500K.
>>>
>>>What I want to happen is that the mail comes in, is passed on by ASSP
>>>to my MTA and then it is replicated and sent out to each of the
>>>individual users in the list.  However, this is not what happened.
>>>
>>>Instead ASSP processed  each mail individually - the same mail
>>>hundreds of times.  Each of these email clones was passed first to my
>>>anti-virus service and then finally to my MTA where the actual
>>>replication should occur, if I can control that.
>>>
>>>I am not positive that Exchange is doing the replication, although
>>>Theo has said that ASSP is not doing it.  It has to be either Exchange
>>>or ASSP.
>>>
>>>So my assumption at this point is that the users sends his mail,
>>>Exchange then replicates it for each user on the list and sends each
>>>mail clone individually to ASSP, causing a ridiculous amount of
>>>performance degradation for no good reason as ASSP processes each one,
>>>then my anti-spam service processes each one, then finally each one is
>>>sent out via my MTA.
>>>
>>>Does that make sense?
>>>
>>>Thanks!
>>>
>>>Jeff
>>>
>>>Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I'm an Exchange admin, and I have access to some good Exchange info.
>>>>Exactly what are you asking about here?  I might be able to dig up an
>>>>answer, but so far I'm not following what you mean by "replication".
>>>>
>>>>On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Theo -
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
>>>>>
>>>>>The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd (c/c++ app and
>>>>>very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA), which could
>>>>>handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is where the
>>>>>replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD (except for
>>>>>the
>>>>>Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
>>>>>normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
>>>>>load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
>>>>>that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
>>>>>Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some mail server
>>>>>>in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
>>>>>>server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
>>>>>>server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
>>>>>>organization).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange and whatever
>>>>>>it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't replicate the
>>>>>>emails.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
>>>>>>proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
>>>>>>Destination to do the replicating.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
>>>>>>(what kind of server/software)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Theo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   *From:* ass...@li...
>>>>>>   [mailto:ass...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Jeff
>>>>>>   Buehler
>>>>>>   *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
>>>>>>   *To:* ass...@li...
>>>>>>   *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Hi Theo -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user from this one
>>>>>>   organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
>>>>>>   especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
>>>>>>   then one of the following occurs:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange  (lets say
>>>>>>   there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
>>>>>>   100 emails)
>>>>>>   2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
>>>>>>   to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
>>>>>>   3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
>>>>>>   it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
>>>>>>   (clamsmtpd) service
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
>>>>>>   which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
>>>>>>   backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the load average
>>>>>>   for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
>>>>>>   anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
>>>>>>   anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
>>>>>>   to scan it for each user).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
>>>>>>   Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
>>>>>>   smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be "cloned" for each
>>>>>>   recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
>>>>>>   "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
>>>>>>   passing all that mail on...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Jeff
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
>>>>>>
>>>>>>something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
>>>>>>
>>>>>>using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
>>>>>>
>>>>>>notification to boot that something happened.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this reason.  The
>>>>>>
>>>>>>only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Theo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>From: ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jeff Buehler
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>To: ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi all -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>condensed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>and I don't
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>know about it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click
>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=click>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>Ass...@li...
>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>_______________________________________________
>>Assp-user mailing list
>>Ass...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

ok, I wanna back track for a minute here.  What is it you are seeing
that is leading you to beleive that ASSP is receiving "replicants" ?


On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> I suppose that makes sense - I know of no way to do it using XMail,
> Postfix, or Sendmail (that doesn't mean it can't be done in any of those
> MTA's, though!).  It seems like an important feature in this particular
> instance.
>=20
> Jeff
>=20
> Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>=20
> >Unless you are using Exchange to smart relay, Exchange is going to
> >behave as an MTA.  When it gets an email in its queue, the next stop
> >is the local recipient or (to what it thinks is) the recipients mail
> >server.  With this in mind, mail is going to be sent individually per
> >domain.
> >
> >AFAIK, if something is sent to TO: and CC: fields, as long as it is
> >within the same domain, it should stay as a single email.  Separate
> >domains should get split off.
> >
> >Anything BCC'd will get sent individually.
> >
> >AFAIK, there is no way to alter this behavior.  I don't know how you
> >could alter this behavior on any MTA.
> >
> >If this is contrary to what you are seeing, I will confer with some
> >Exchange MVP acquaintances.
> >
> >
> >On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>One other thing I should add - I am seeing (and I have been for awhile)
> >>exact duplicates in "notspam" of emails - two or more.  It would make
> >>sense if an Exchange user was sending out an email to more than 1 user
> >>and they were being replicated - each email would be relegated to
> >>notspam individually.
> >>
> >>There must be a way to stop that from Exchange! (I hope...)
> >>Someone else must have run into this at some point... it seems like it
> >>would be a very common problem.
> >>
> >>Also, it would be great if there were a way to prevent ASSP from
> >>processing mails from trusted users from a performance standpoint (othe=
r
> >>than to whitelist, isspam, notspam.) as mentioned earlier - this would
> >>also improve performance by a huge factor.  No one has really commented
> >>on this other than Theo who wants to process these mails
> >>(understandable), so I assume that at this point there is no way to
> >>prevent them from being processed.
> >>
> >>Thanks again,
> >>
> >>Jeff
> >>
> >>
> >>Jeff Buehler wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hi Micheal -
> >>>
> >>>Thanks for your input...
> >>>
> >>>One of my clients runs Exchange on a remote box - it sends mail via
> >>>Smart Host to my server running ASSP under FreeBSD.
> >>>
> >>>Recently, one of the users sent out mail to hundreds of users.  The
> >>>mail was about 500K.
> >>>
> >>>What I want to happen is that the mail comes in, is passed on by ASSP
> >>>to my MTA and then it is replicated and sent out to each of the
> >>>individual users in the list.  However, this is not what happened.
> >>>
> >>>Instead ASSP processed  each mail individually - the same mail
> >>>hundreds of times.  Each of these email clones was passed first to my
> >>>anti-virus service and then finally to my MTA where the actual
> >>>replication should occur, if I can control that.
> >>>
> >>>I am not positive that Exchange is doing the replication, although
> >>>Theo has said that ASSP is not doing it.  It has to be either Exchange
> >>>or ASSP.
> >>>
> >>>So my assumption at this point is that the users sends his mail,
> >>>Exchange then replicates it for each user on the list and sends each
> >>>mail clone individually to ASSP, causing a ridiculous amount of
> >>>performance degradation for no good reason as ASSP processes each one,
> >>>then my anti-spam service processes each one, then finally each one is
> >>>sent out via my MTA.
> >>>
> >>>Does that make sense?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks!
> >>>
> >>>Jeff
> >>>
> >>>Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>I'm an Exchange admin, and I have access to some good Exchange info.
> >>>>Exactly what are you asking about here?  I might be able to dig up an
> >>>>answer, but so far I'm not following what you mean by "replication".
> >>>>
> >>>>On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hi Theo -
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd (c/c++ app a=
nd
> >>>>>very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA), which cou=
ld
> >>>>>handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is where t=
he
> >>>>>replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD (except for
> >>>>>the
> >>>>>Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
> >>>>>normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
> >>>>>load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
> >>>>>that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
> >>>>>Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Thanks!
> >>>>>Jeff
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some mail serv=
er
> >>>>>>in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
> >>>>>>server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
> >>>>>>server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
> >>>>>>organization).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange and whatev=
er
> >>>>>>it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't replicate t=
he
> >>>>>>emails.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
> >>>>>>proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
> >>>>>>Destination to do the replicating.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
> >>>>>>(what kind of server/software)?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Theo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   *From:* ass...@li...
> >>>>>>   [mailto:ass...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Je=
ff
> >>>>>>   Buehler
> >>>>>>   *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
> >>>>>>   *To:* ass...@li...
> >>>>>>   *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Hi Theo -
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user from this o=
ne
> >>>>>>   organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
> >>>>>>   especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
> >>>>>>   then one of the following occurs:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange  (lets sa=
y
> >>>>>>   there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
> >>>>>>   100 emails)
> >>>>>>   2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
> >>>>>>   to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
> >>>>>>   3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
> >>>>>>   it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
> >>>>>>   (clamsmtpd) service
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
> >>>>>>   which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
> >>>>>>   backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the load averag=
e
> >>>>>>   for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
> >>>>>>   anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
> >>>>>>   anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
> >>>>>>   to scan it for each user).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
> >>>>>>   Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
> >>>>>>   smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be "cloned" for eac=
h
> >>>>>>   recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
> >>>>>>   "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
> >>>>>>   passing all that mail on...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Thanks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Jeff
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does d=
o
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propaga=
te
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>notification to boot that something happened.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this reason.  =
The
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Theo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>From: ass...@li...
> >>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Jeff Buehler
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>To: ass...@li...
> >>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Hi all -
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much mor=
e
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>condensed:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way t=
o
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>and I don't
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>know about it?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Jeff
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> >>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strateg=
ies
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=3Dclick
> >>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategi=
es
> >>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=
=3Dclick
> >>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> >>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dc=
lick
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>Ass...@li...
> >>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> >>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dcl=
ick
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Assp-user mailing list
> >>Ass...@li...
> >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclic=
k
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

I said this in the mail I just sent, but in this case a "replicant" 
means that when an MTA receives an email (like Exchange) that will be 
sent to many users, then it sends a copy of that email to each of those 
users.  Each email in this case is a "replica" of the last.  That is 
what we are talking about, right?


Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:

>ok, I wanna back track for a minute here.  What is it you are seeing
>that is leading you to beleive that ASSP is receiving "replicants" ?
>
>
>On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
>  
>
>>I suppose that makes sense - I know of no way to do it using XMail,
>>Postfix, or Sendmail (that doesn't mean it can't be done in any of those
>>MTA's, though!).  It seems like an important feature in this particular
>>instance.
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Unless you are using Exchange to smart relay, Exchange is going to
>>>behave as an MTA.  When it gets an email in its queue, the next stop
>>>is the local recipient or (to what it thinks is) the recipients mail
>>>server.  With this in mind, mail is going to be sent individually per
>>>domain.
>>>
>>>AFAIK, if something is sent to TO: and CC: fields, as long as it is
>>>within the same domain, it should stay as a single email.  Separate
>>>domains should get split off.
>>>
>>>Anything BCC'd will get sent individually.
>>>
>>>AFAIK, there is no way to alter this behavior.  I don't know how you
>>>could alter this behavior on any MTA.
>>>
>>>If this is contrary to what you are seeing, I will confer with some
>>>Exchange MVP acquaintances.
>>>
>>>
>>>On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>One other thing I should add - I am seeing (and I have been for awhile)
>>>>exact duplicates in "notspam" of emails - two or more.  It would make
>>>>sense if an Exchange user was sending out an email to more than 1 user
>>>>and they were being replicated - each email would be relegated to
>>>>notspam individually.
>>>>
>>>>There must be a way to stop that from Exchange! (I hope...)
>>>>Someone else must have run into this at some point... it seems like it
>>>>would be a very common problem.
>>>>
>>>>Also, it would be great if there were a way to prevent ASSP from
>>>>processing mails from trusted users from a performance standpoint (other
>>>>than to whitelist, isspam, notspam.) as mentioned earlier - this would
>>>>also improve performance by a huge factor.  No one has really commented
>>>>on this other than Theo who wants to process these mails
>>>>(understandable), so I assume that at this point there is no way to
>>>>prevent them from being processed.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks again,
>>>>
>>>>Jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Jeff Buehler wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Micheal -
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks for your input...
>>>>>
>>>>>One of my clients runs Exchange on a remote box - it sends mail via
>>>>>Smart Host to my server running ASSP under FreeBSD.
>>>>>
>>>>>Recently, one of the users sent out mail to hundreds of users.  The
>>>>>mail was about 500K.
>>>>>
>>>>>What I want to happen is that the mail comes in, is passed on by ASSP
>>>>>to my MTA and then it is replicated and sent out to each of the
>>>>>individual users in the list.  However, this is not what happened.
>>>>>
>>>>>Instead ASSP processed  each mail individually - the same mail
>>>>>hundreds of times.  Each of these email clones was passed first to my
>>>>>anti-virus service and then finally to my MTA where the actual
>>>>>replication should occur, if I can control that.
>>>>>
>>>>>I am not positive that Exchange is doing the replication, although
>>>>>Theo has said that ASSP is not doing it.  It has to be either Exchange
>>>>>or ASSP.
>>>>>
>>>>>So my assumption at this point is that the users sends his mail,
>>>>>Exchange then replicates it for each user on the list and sends each
>>>>>mail clone individually to ASSP, causing a ridiculous amount of
>>>>>performance degradation for no good reason as ASSP processes each one,
>>>>>then my anti-spam service processes each one, then finally each one is
>>>>>sent out via my MTA.
>>>>>
>>>>>Does that make sense?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm an Exchange admin, and I have access to some good Exchange info.
>>>>>>Exactly what are you asking about here?  I might be able to dig up an
>>>>>>answer, but so far I'm not following what you mean by "replication".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi Theo -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd (c/c++ app and
>>>>>>>very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA), which could
>>>>>>>handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is where the
>>>>>>>replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD (except for
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
>>>>>>>normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
>>>>>>>load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
>>>>>>>that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
>>>>>>>Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some mail server
>>>>>>>>in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
>>>>>>>>server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
>>>>>>>>server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
>>>>>>>>organization).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange and whatever
>>>>>>>>it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't replicate the
>>>>>>>>emails.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
>>>>>>>>proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
>>>>>>>>Destination to do the replicating.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
>>>>>>>>(what kind of server/software)?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Theo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  *From:* ass...@li...
>>>>>>>>  [mailto:ass...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Jeff
>>>>>>>>  Buehler
>>>>>>>>  *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
>>>>>>>>  *To:* ass...@li...
>>>>>>>>  *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Hi Theo -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user from this one
>>>>>>>>  organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
>>>>>>>>  especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
>>>>>>>>  then one of the following occurs:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange  (lets say
>>>>>>>>  there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
>>>>>>>>  100 emails)
>>>>>>>>  2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
>>>>>>>>  to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
>>>>>>>>  3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
>>>>>>>>  it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
>>>>>>>>  (clamsmtpd) service
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
>>>>>>>>  which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
>>>>>>>>  backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the load average
>>>>>>>>  for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
>>>>>>>>  anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
>>>>>>>>  anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
>>>>>>>>  to scan it for each user).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
>>>>>>>>  Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
>>>>>>>>  smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be "cloned" for each
>>>>>>>>  recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
>>>>>>>>  "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
>>>>>>>>  passing all that mail on...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Jeff
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>notification to boot that something happened.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this reason.  The
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Theo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>From: ass...@li...
>>>>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Jeff Buehler
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>To: ass...@li...
>>>>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Hi all -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>condensed:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>and I don't
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>know about it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click
>>>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=click>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>      
>>>
>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>_______________________________________________
>>Assp-user mailing list
>>Ass...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>

RE: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Theo A. <tau...@lo...>]

I must admit that I don't know for sure that assp is not doing this.  My
answer assumed that since ASSP is a proxy, it would only pass through
the SMTP commands from exchange.

After having tried this myself, I noticed that I get multiple copies of
the email in the "okmail" folder, so it is likely that my setup is
behaving the same as yours.

I'll be looking into exchange settings in my spare time in the next few
days trying to prove (or not) that exchange is replicating the email.

Theo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ass...@li...=20
> [mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of=20
> Jeff Buehler
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:37 PM
> To: ass...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>=20
>=20
> Hi Theo -
>=20
> Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
>=20
> The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd=20
> (c/c++ app and=20
> very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA),=20
> which could=20
> handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is=20
> where the=20
> replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD=20
> (except for the=20
> Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -=20
> normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register=20
> load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct=20
> that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be=20
> Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
>=20
> Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
>=20
> Thanks!
> Jeff
>=20
> Theo Aukerman wrote:
>=20
> > Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some=20
> mail server
> > in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP=20
> > server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail=20
> > server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your=20
> > organization).
> > =20
> > As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange=20
> and whatever
> > it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't=20
> replicate the=20
> > emails.
> > =20
> > You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
> > proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP=20
> > Destination to do the replicating.
> > =20
> > Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
> > =20
> > I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
> > (what kind of server/software)?
> > =20
> > Theo
> >
> >    =20
> >=20
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> >
> >     *From:* ass...@li...
> >     [mailto:ass...@li...] *On=20
> Behalf Of *Jeff
> >     Buehler
> >     *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
> >     *To:* ass...@li...
> >     *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >
> >     =20
> >
> >     Hi Theo -
> >
> >     Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user=20
> from this one
> >     organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
> >     especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
> >     then one of the following occurs:
> >
> >     1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange =20
> (lets say
> >     there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
> >     100 emails)
> >     2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
> >     to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
> >     3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
> >     it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
> >     (clamsmtpd) service
> >
> >     Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
> >     which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
> >     backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the=20
> load average
> >     for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
> >     anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
> >     anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
> >     to scan it for each user).
> >
> >     So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
> >     Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
> >     smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be=20
> "cloned" for each
> >     recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
> >     "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
> >     passing all that mail on...
> >
> >     Thanks,
> >
> >     Jeff
> >
> >
> >     Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >
> >I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
> >
> >something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
> >
> >using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
> >
> >notification to boot that something happened.
> >
> >=20
> >
> >I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this=20
> reason.  The
> >
> >only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
> >
> >=20
> >
> >Theo
> >
> >=20
> >
> >=20
> >
> > =20
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>
> >>From: ass...@li...=20
> >><mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>
> >>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> >>
> >>Jeff Buehler
> >>
> >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
> >>
> >>To: ass...@li...=20
> >><mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>
> >>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>Hi all -
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
> >>
> >>condensed:
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
> >>
> >>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
> >>
> >>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
> >>
> >>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
> >>
> >>and I don't
> >>
> >>know about it?
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
> >>
> >>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>Jeff
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>
> >>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> >>
> >>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> >>
> >>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> >>
> >>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick=20
> >><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>
> >>Assp-user mailing list
> >>
> >>Ass...@li...=20
> >><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>
> >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>
> >>=20
> >>
> >>   =20
> >>
> >=20
> >
> >=20
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration=20
> Strategies
> >
> >from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >
> >informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >
> >speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=3Dclick=20
> ><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=3Dclick>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >
> >Assp-user mailing list
> >
> >Ass...@li...=20
> ><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >
> >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >
> >=20
> >
> > =20
> >
> >     =20
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration=20
> Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,=20
> straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get=20
> everything you need to get up to speed, fast.=20
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...=20
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

I just performed some tests.  In Exchange 2003 (and I am going to
assume the behavior is the same in previous versions, because I have
never had any reason to believe it wasn't), email is queued
per-domain.  The only way email gets split/replicated is if there are
multiple domains and/or BCC's.

I just did it through ASSP, and that was the behavior.

My "notspam" folder only has 1 email saved _per_email_sent.  I sent a
test to multiple accounts from multiple domains, including a separate
domain for multiple BCC's.  There is only 1 email saved in the notspam
folder.

This confirms my earlier message.  If Exchange is smart-relaying
through ASSP, there should only be (1) message sent through ASSP.=20
Once it hits back to the relay (virtual server), then it gets split
off per-domain in the queues.

Jeff, could you be confusing the multiple lines in the Mail Log that
reflect each address that is being sent to?

HTH


On 7/26/05, Theo Aukerman <tau...@lo...> wrote:
> I must admit that I don't know for sure that assp is not doing this.  My
> answer assumed that since ASSP is a proxy, it would only pass through
> the SMTP commands from exchange.
>=20
> After having tried this myself, I noticed that I get multiple copies of
> the email in the "okmail" folder, so it is likely that my setup is
> behaving the same as yours.
>=20
> I'll be looking into exchange settings in my spare time in the next few
> days trying to prove (or not) that exchange is replicating the email.
>=20
> Theo
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ass...@li...
> > [mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> > Jeff Buehler
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:37 PM
> > To: ass...@li...
> > Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >
> >
> > Hi Theo -
> >
> > Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
> >
> > The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd
> > (c/c++ app and
> > very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA),
> > which could
> > handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is
> > where the
> > replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD
> > (except for the
> > Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
> > normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
> > load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
> > that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
> > Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
> >
> > Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Jeff
> >
> > Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >
> > > Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some
> > mail server
> > > in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
> > > server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
> > > server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
> > > organization).
> > >
> > > As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange
> > and whatever
> > > it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't
> > replicate the
> > > emails.
> > >
> > > You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
> > > proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
> > > Destination to do the replicating.
> > >
> > > Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
> > >
> > > I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
> > > (what kind of server/software)?
> > >
> > > Theo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > --
> > >
> > >     *From:* ass...@li...
> > >     [mailto:ass...@li...] *On
> > Behalf Of *Jeff
> > >     Buehler
> > >     *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
> > >     *To:* ass...@li...
> > >     *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >     Hi Theo -
> > >
> > >     Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user
> > from this one
> > >     organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
> > >     especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
> > >     then one of the following occurs:
> > >
> > >     1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange
> > (lets say
> > >     there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
> > >     100 emails)
> > >     2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
> > >     to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
> > >     3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
> > >     it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
> > >     (clamsmtpd) service
> > >
> > >     Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
> > >     which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
> > >     backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the
> > load average
> > >     for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
> > >     anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
> > >     anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
> > >     to scan it for each user).
> > >
> > >     So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
> > >     Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
> > >     smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be
> > "cloned" for each
> > >     recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
> > >     "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
> > >     passing all that mail on...
> > >
> > >     Thanks,
> > >
> > >     Jeff
> > >
> > >
> > >     Theo Aukerman wrote:
> > >
> > >I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
> > >
> > >something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
> > >
> > >using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
> > >
> > >notification to boot that something happened.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this
> > reason.  The
> > >
> > >only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Theo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>
> > >>From: ass...@li...
> > >><mailto:ass...@li...>
> > >>
> > >>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> > >>
> > >>Jeff Buehler
> > >>
> > >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
> > >>
> > >>To: ass...@li...
> > >><mailto:ass...@li...>
> > >>
> > >>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Hi all -
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
> > >>
> > >>condensed:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
> > >>
> > >>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
> > >>
> > >>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
> > >>
> > >>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
> > >>
> > >>and I don't
> > >>
> > >>know about it?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
> > >>
> > >>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Jeff
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>-------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> > >>
> > >>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> > >>
> > >>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> > >>
> > >>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> > >>
> > >>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> > >><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick>
> > >>
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>
> > >>Assp-user mailing list
> > >>
> > >>Ass...@li...
> > >><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> > >>
> > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> > Strategies
> > >
> > >from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> > >
> > >informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> > >
> > >speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=3Dclick
> > ><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=3Dclick>
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >
> > >Assp-user mailing list
> > >
> > >Ass...@li...
> > ><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> > >
> > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> > Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> > straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> > everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> > _______________________________________________
> > Assp-user mailing list
> > Ass...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id=16492&opclick
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

Hi Michael -

Queued per domain?  Do you mean that for each distinct domain you are 
seeing Exchange sending out a copy of the email as would be expected?  
If so, then this is the same behavior I'm talking about.

If I have a mailing list of 1000 distinct addresses with distinct 
domains, then would or would not Exchange send to ASSP 1000 distinct 
emails for each of these recipients based on your findings below?

This is not an issue pertaining to the logs - my user sent the mail out, 
and then my server struggled to keep up as hundreds of the same email 
were processed, one for each user being sent to, and then passed to my 
anti-virus scanner, which struggled with them, and then finally to my 
MTA.  This means that either Exchange sent an distinct copy of the email 
to each specified recipient, or that ASSP did.

And of course, if we are talking about 100 distinct addresses, then 
there will be 100 distinct lines in the mail log, even if the email is 
otherwise exactly the same.

Are we talking about the same thing?  It seems you think I am talking 
about the same mail to the same recipient being duplicated - I am not.  
I am talking about the same mail to distinct recipients being duplicated 
(or replicated).  And this is a problem for me at the moment.

Jeff

Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:

>I just performed some tests.  In Exchange 2003 (and I am going to
>assume the behavior is the same in previous versions, because I have
>never had any reason to believe it wasn't), email is queued
>per-domain.  The only way email gets split/replicated is if there are
>multiple domains and/or BCC's.
>
>I just did it through ASSP, and that was the behavior.
>
>My "notspam" folder only has 1 email saved _per_email_sent.  I sent a
>test to multiple accounts from multiple domains, including a separate
>domain for multiple BCC's.  There is only 1 email saved in the notspam
>folder.
>
>This confirms my earlier message.  If Exchange is smart-relaying
>through ASSP, there should only be (1) message sent through ASSP. 
>Once it hits back to the relay (virtual server), then it gets split
>off per-domain in the queues.
>
>Jeff, could you be confusing the multiple lines in the Mail Log that
>reflect each address that is being sent to?
>
>HTH
>
>
>On 7/26/05, Theo Aukerman <tau...@lo...> wrote:
>  
>
>>I must admit that I don't know for sure that assp is not doing this.  My
>>answer assumed that since ASSP is a proxy, it would only pass through
>>the SMTP commands from exchange.
>>
>>After having tried this myself, I noticed that I get multiple copies of
>>the email in the "okmail" folder, so it is likely that my setup is
>>behaving the same as yours.
>>
>>I'll be looking into exchange settings in my spare time in the next few
>>days trying to prove (or not) that exchange is replicating the email.
>>
>>Theo
>>
>>    
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: ass...@li...
>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>Jeff Buehler
>>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:37 PM
>>>To: ass...@li...
>>>Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>
>>>
>>>Hi Theo -
>>>
>>>Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
>>>
>>>The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd
>>>(c/c++ app and
>>>very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA),
>>>which could
>>>handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is
>>>where the
>>>replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD
>>>(except for the
>>>Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
>>>normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
>>>load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
>>>that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
>>>Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
>>>
>>>Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
>>>
>>>Thanks!
>>>Jeff
>>>
>>>Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>mail server
>>>      
>>>
>>>>in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
>>>>server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
>>>>server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
>>>>organization).
>>>>
>>>>As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>and whatever
>>>      
>>>
>>>>it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>replicate the
>>>      
>>>
>>>>emails.
>>>>
>>>>You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
>>>>proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
>>>>Destination to do the replicating.
>>>>
>>>>Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
>>>>
>>>>I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
>>>>(what kind of server/software)?
>>>>
>>>>Theo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>      
>>>
>>>>--
>>>>
>>>>    *From:* ass...@li...
>>>>    [mailto:ass...@li...] *On
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Behalf Of *Jeff
>>>      
>>>
>>>>    Buehler
>>>>    *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
>>>>    *To:* ass...@li...
>>>>    *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    Hi Theo -
>>>>
>>>>    Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>from this one
>>>      
>>>
>>>>    organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
>>>>    especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
>>>>    then one of the following occurs:
>>>>
>>>>    1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>(lets say
>>>      
>>>
>>>>    there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
>>>>    100 emails)
>>>>    2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
>>>>    to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
>>>>    3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
>>>>    it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
>>>>    (clamsmtpd) service
>>>>
>>>>    Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
>>>>    which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
>>>>    backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>load average
>>>      
>>>
>>>>    for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
>>>>    anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
>>>>    anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
>>>>    to scan it for each user).
>>>>
>>>>    So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
>>>>    Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
>>>>    smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>"cloned" for each
>>>      
>>>
>>>>    recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
>>>>    "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
>>>>    passing all that mail on...
>>>>
>>>>    Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>    Jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
>>>>
>>>>something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
>>>>
>>>>using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
>>>>
>>>>notification to boot that something happened.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>reason.  The
>>>      
>>>
>>>>only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Theo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>
>>>>>From: ass...@li...
>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>
>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>>>
>>>>>Jeff Buehler
>>>>>
>>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
>>>>>
>>>>>To: ass...@li...
>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>
>>>>>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi all -
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
>>>>>
>>>>>condensed:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
>>>>>
>>>>>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
>>>>>
>>>>>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
>>>>>
>>>>>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
>>>>>
>>>>>and I don't
>>>>>
>>>>>know about it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
>>>>>
>>>>>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>
>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>>>
>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>>>
>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click>
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>
>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Strategies
>>>      
>>>
>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>      
>>>
>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>
>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click
>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=click>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>
>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>
>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>Ass...@li...
>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&opclick
>>_______________________________________________
>>Assp-user mailing list
>>Ass...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

No, Exchange does not send 1000 copies to ASSP.  It is (supposed to
be) smart-relaying through ASSP to another SMTP server.  In the smart
relay situation, only the original email relays through.  It does not
get distributed or split in any fashion.

Only after it hits the second SMTP server (the other end of the smart
relay) for final delivery does the message get split up into
individual queues.

What version of Exchange?  What version of Outlook?  This is an
Outlook client sending through Exchange via MAPI (not SMTP/POP3) ?

I have been using ASSP for years now, with Exchange 2000 and now 2003.
 What you are describing so far should not be happening.  Something is
being misinterpreted, or is configured incorrectly.


On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> Hi Michael -
>=20
> Queued per domain?  Do you mean that for each distinct domain you are
> seeing Exchange sending out a copy of the email as would be expected?
> If so, then this is the same behavior I'm talking about.
>=20
> If I have a mailing list of 1000 distinct addresses with distinct
> domains, then would or would not Exchange send to ASSP 1000 distinct
> emails for each of these recipients based on your findings below?
>=20
> This is not an issue pertaining to the logs - my user sent the mail out,
> and then my server struggled to keep up as hundreds of the same email
> were processed, one for each user being sent to, and then passed to my
> anti-virus scanner, which struggled with them, and then finally to my
> MTA.  This means that either Exchange sent an distinct copy of the email
> to each specified recipient, or that ASSP did.
>=20
> And of course, if we are talking about 100 distinct addresses, then
> there will be 100 distinct lines in the mail log, even if the email is
> otherwise exactly the same.
>=20
> Are we talking about the same thing?  It seems you think I am talking
> about the same mail to the same recipient being duplicated - I am not.
> I am talking about the same mail to distinct recipients being duplicated
> (or replicated).  And this is a problem for me at the moment.
>=20
> Jeff
>=20
> Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>=20
> >I just performed some tests.  In Exchange 2003 (and I am going to
> >assume the behavior is the same in previous versions, because I have
> >never had any reason to believe it wasn't), email is queued
> >per-domain.  The only way email gets split/replicated is if there are
> >multiple domains and/or BCC's.
> >
> >I just did it through ASSP, and that was the behavior.
> >
> >My "notspam" folder only has 1 email saved _per_email_sent.  I sent a
> >test to multiple accounts from multiple domains, including a separate
> >domain for multiple BCC's.  There is only 1 email saved in the notspam
> >folder.
> >
> >This confirms my earlier message.  If Exchange is smart-relaying
> >through ASSP, there should only be (1) message sent through ASSP.
> >Once it hits back to the relay (virtual server), then it gets split
> >off per-domain in the queues.
> >
> >Jeff, could you be confusing the multiple lines in the Mail Log that
> >reflect each address that is being sent to?
> >
> >HTH
> >
> >
> >On 7/26/05, Theo Aukerman <tau...@lo...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I must admit that I don't know for sure that assp is not doing this.  M=
y
> >>answer assumed that since ASSP is a proxy, it would only pass through
> >>the SMTP commands from exchange.
> >>
> >>After having tried this myself, I noticed that I get multiple copies of
> >>the email in the "okmail" folder, so it is likely that my setup is
> >>behaving the same as yours.
> >>
> >>I'll be looking into exchange settings in my spare time in the next few
> >>days trying to prove (or not) that exchange is replicating the email.
> >>
> >>Theo
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: ass...@li...
> >>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> >>>Jeff Buehler
> >>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:37 PM
> >>>To: ass...@li...
> >>>Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Hi Theo -
> >>>
> >>>Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
> >>>
> >>>The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd
> >>>(c/c++ app and
> >>>very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA),
> >>>which could
> >>>handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is
> >>>where the
> >>>replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD
> >>>(except for the
> >>>Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
> >>>normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
> >>>load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
> >>>that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
> >>>Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
> >>>
> >>>Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks!
> >>>Jeff
> >>>
> >>>Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>mail server
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
> >>>>server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
> >>>>server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
> >>>>organization).
> >>>>
> >>>>As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>and whatever
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>replicate the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>emails.
> >>>>
> >>>>You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
> >>>>proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
> >>>>Destination to do the replicating.
> >>>>
> >>>>Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
> >>>>
> >>>>I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
> >>>>(what kind of server/software)?
> >>>>
> >>>>Theo
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>--
> >>>>
> >>>>    *From:* ass...@li...
> >>>>    [mailto:ass...@li...] *On
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Behalf Of *Jeff
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>    Buehler
> >>>>    *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
> >>>>    *To:* ass...@li...
> >>>>    *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    Hi Theo -
> >>>>
> >>>>    Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>from this one
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>    organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
> >>>>    especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
> >>>>    then one of the following occurs:
> >>>>
> >>>>    1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>(lets say
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>    there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
> >>>>    100 emails)
> >>>>    2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
> >>>>    to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
> >>>>    3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
> >>>>    it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
> >>>>    (clamsmtpd) service
> >>>>
> >>>>    Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
> >>>>    which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
> >>>>    backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>load average
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>    for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
> >>>>    anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
> >>>>    anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
> >>>>    to scan it for each user).
> >>>>
> >>>>    So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
> >>>>    Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
> >>>>    smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>"cloned" for each
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>    recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
> >>>>    "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
> >>>>    passing all that mail on...
> >>>>
> >>>>    Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>>    Jeff
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
> >>>>
> >>>>something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
> >>>>
> >>>>using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
> >>>>
> >>>>notification to boot that something happened.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>reason.  The
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Theo
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>>
> >>>>>From: ass...@li...
> >>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Jeff Buehler
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
> >>>>>
> >>>>>To: ass...@li...
> >>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Hi all -
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
> >>>>>
> >>>>>condensed:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
> >>>>>
> >>>>>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
> >>>>>
> >>>>>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
> >>>>>
> >>>>>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
> >>>>>
> >>>>>and I don't
> >>>>>
> >>>>>know about it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
> >>>>>
> >>>>>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Jeff
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> >>>>>
> >>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> >>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Strategies
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>>>
> >>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=3Dclick
> >>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>>>
> >>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>
> >>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>>>
> >>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> >>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> >>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> >>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>Ass...@li...
> >>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> >>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id=16492&opclick
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Assp-user mailing list
> >>Ass...@li...
> >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclic=
k
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

By the way, I am using an SMTP Smart Host setting, not a connector, in 
case that might make a difference?

Jeff


Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:

>No, Exchange does not send 1000 copies to ASSP.  It is (supposed to
>be) smart-relaying through ASSP to another SMTP server.  In the smart
>relay situation, only the original email relays through.  It does not
>get distributed or split in any fashion.
>
>Only after it hits the second SMTP server (the other end of the smart
>relay) for final delivery does the message get split up into
>individual queues.
>
>What version of Exchange?  What version of Outlook?  This is an
>Outlook client sending through Exchange via MAPI (not SMTP/POP3) ?
>
>I have been using ASSP for years now, with Exchange 2000 and now 2003.
> What you are describing so far should not be happening.  Something is
>being misinterpreted, or is configured incorrectly.
>
>
>On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi Michael -
>>
>>Queued per domain?  Do you mean that for each distinct domain you are
>>seeing Exchange sending out a copy of the email as would be expected?
>>If so, then this is the same behavior I'm talking about.
>>
>>If I have a mailing list of 1000 distinct addresses with distinct
>>domains, then would or would not Exchange send to ASSP 1000 distinct
>>emails for each of these recipients based on your findings below?
>>
>>This is not an issue pertaining to the logs - my user sent the mail out,
>>and then my server struggled to keep up as hundreds of the same email
>>were processed, one for each user being sent to, and then passed to my
>>anti-virus scanner, which struggled with them, and then finally to my
>>MTA.  This means that either Exchange sent an distinct copy of the email
>>to each specified recipient, or that ASSP did.
>>
>>And of course, if we are talking about 100 distinct addresses, then
>>there will be 100 distinct lines in the mail log, even if the email is
>>otherwise exactly the same.
>>
>>Are we talking about the same thing?  It seems you think I am talking
>>about the same mail to the same recipient being duplicated - I am not.
>>I am talking about the same mail to distinct recipients being duplicated
>>(or replicated).  And this is a problem for me at the moment.
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I just performed some tests.  In Exchange 2003 (and I am going to
>>>assume the behavior is the same in previous versions, because I have
>>>never had any reason to believe it wasn't), email is queued
>>>per-domain.  The only way email gets split/replicated is if there are
>>>multiple domains and/or BCC's.
>>>
>>>I just did it through ASSP, and that was the behavior.
>>>
>>>My "notspam" folder only has 1 email saved _per_email_sent.  I sent a
>>>test to multiple accounts from multiple domains, including a separate
>>>domain for multiple BCC's.  There is only 1 email saved in the notspam
>>>folder.
>>>
>>>This confirms my earlier message.  If Exchange is smart-relaying
>>>through ASSP, there should only be (1) message sent through ASSP.
>>>Once it hits back to the relay (virtual server), then it gets split
>>>off per-domain in the queues.
>>>
>>>Jeff, could you be confusing the multiple lines in the Mail Log that
>>>reflect each address that is being sent to?
>>>
>>>HTH
>>>
>>>
>>>On 7/26/05, Theo Aukerman <tau...@lo...> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I must admit that I don't know for sure that assp is not doing this.  My
>>>>answer assumed that since ASSP is a proxy, it would only pass through
>>>>the SMTP commands from exchange.
>>>>
>>>>After having tried this myself, I noticed that I get multiple copies of
>>>>the email in the "okmail" folder, so it is likely that my setup is
>>>>behaving the same as yours.
>>>>
>>>>I'll be looking into exchange settings in my spare time in the next few
>>>>days trying to prove (or not) that exchange is replicating the email.
>>>>
>>>>Theo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: ass...@li...
>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>>>Jeff Buehler
>>>>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:37 PM
>>>>>To: ass...@li...
>>>>>Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Theo -
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
>>>>>
>>>>>The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd
>>>>>(c/c++ app and
>>>>>very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA),
>>>>>which could
>>>>>handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is
>>>>>where the
>>>>>replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD
>>>>>(except for the
>>>>>Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
>>>>>normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
>>>>>load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
>>>>>that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
>>>>>Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>mail server
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
>>>>>>server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
>>>>>>server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
>>>>>>organization).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>and whatever
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>replicate the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>emails.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
>>>>>>proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
>>>>>>Destination to do the replicating.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
>>>>>>(what kind of server/software)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Theo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   *From:* ass...@li...
>>>>>>   [mailto:ass...@li...] *On
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>Behalf Of *Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   Buehler
>>>>>>   *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
>>>>>>   *To:* ass...@li...
>>>>>>   *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Hi Theo -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>from this one
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
>>>>>>   especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
>>>>>>   then one of the following occurs:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>(lets say
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
>>>>>>   100 emails)
>>>>>>   2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
>>>>>>   to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
>>>>>>   3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
>>>>>>   it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
>>>>>>   (clamsmtpd) service
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
>>>>>>   which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
>>>>>>   backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>load average
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
>>>>>>   anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
>>>>>>   anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
>>>>>>   to scan it for each user).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
>>>>>>   Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
>>>>>>   smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>"cloned" for each
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
>>>>>>   "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
>>>>>>   passing all that mail on...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Jeff
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
>>>>>>
>>>>>>something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
>>>>>>
>>>>>>using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
>>>>>>
>>>>>>notification to boot that something happened.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>reason.  The
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Theo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>From: ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jeff Buehler
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>To: ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi all -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>condensed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>and I don't
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>know about it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>Strategies
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click
>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=click>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>      
>>>
>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&opclick
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>_______________________________________________
>>Assp-user mailing list
>>Ass...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[<bil...@gr...>]

question for Jeff:

What's the flow on your outgoing mail?  You probably already wrote it 
in an earlier email, but y'all have been talking a lot and I don't 
want to dig.

The reason I ask is that I thought that outgoing mail should 
generally be directed to ASSP first, then the mail server.

If that was the case:

User => assp => virus check => exchange => destination

then ASSP would get a single mail, would it not?  Exchange or 
whatever mta you're using would properly do the splitting up by 
domain & BCCs.


-- 
Bill Christensen
<http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>

Green Building Professionals Directory: <http://directory.greenbuilder.com>
Sustainable Building Calendar: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/calendar/>
Green Real Estate: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/realestate/>
Straw Bale Registry: <http://sbregistry.greenbuilder.com/>
Books/videos/software: <http://bookstore.greenbuilder.com/>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

Question - why do you have your huge mailing list send directly from 
Exchange?  Although there are 13,000 recipients, from what you are 
saying only 1 mail would be processed by ASSP, and the mail would be 
replicated by the final MTA.

Also (since you brought it up!) why would the ASSP log be showing 
multiple instances of an email rather than just one?  It doesn't process 
on a per user basis, just on a per mail basis, right?

The version of Exchange is 2003.  The version of Outlook is Office 
Outlook 2003 SP1.  And yes, this is via MAPI.  Version 1.1.1 of ASSP.

Thanks,
Jeff

Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:

>No, Exchange does not send 1000 copies to ASSP.  It is (supposed to
>be) smart-relaying through ASSP to another SMTP server.  In the smart
>relay situation, only the original email relays through.  It does not
>get distributed or split in any fashion.
>
>Only after it hits the second SMTP server (the other end of the smart
>relay) for final delivery does the message get split up into
>individual queues.
>
>What version of Exchange?  What version of Outlook?  This is an
>Outlook client sending through Exchange via MAPI (not SMTP/POP3) ?
>
>I have been using ASSP for years now, with Exchange 2000 and now 2003.
> What you are describing so far should not be happening.  Something is
>being misinterpreted, or is configured incorrectly.
>
>
>On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi Michael -
>>
>>Queued per domain?  Do you mean that for each distinct domain you are
>>seeing Exchange sending out a copy of the email as would be expected?
>>If so, then this is the same behavior I'm talking about.
>>
>>If I have a mailing list of 1000 distinct addresses with distinct
>>domains, then would or would not Exchange send to ASSP 1000 distinct
>>emails for each of these recipients based on your findings below?
>>
>>This is not an issue pertaining to the logs - my user sent the mail out,
>>and then my server struggled to keep up as hundreds of the same email
>>were processed, one for each user being sent to, and then passed to my
>>anti-virus scanner, which struggled with them, and then finally to my
>>MTA.  This means that either Exchange sent an distinct copy of the email
>>to each specified recipient, or that ASSP did.
>>
>>And of course, if we are talking about 100 distinct addresses, then
>>there will be 100 distinct lines in the mail log, even if the email is
>>otherwise exactly the same.
>>
>>Are we talking about the same thing?  It seems you think I am talking
>>about the same mail to the same recipient being duplicated - I am not.
>>I am talking about the same mail to distinct recipients being duplicated
>>(or replicated).  And this is a problem for me at the moment.
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I just performed some tests.  In Exchange 2003 (and I am going to
>>>assume the behavior is the same in previous versions, because I have
>>>never had any reason to believe it wasn't), email is queued
>>>per-domain.  The only way email gets split/replicated is if there are
>>>multiple domains and/or BCC's.
>>>
>>>I just did it through ASSP, and that was the behavior.
>>>
>>>My "notspam" folder only has 1 email saved _per_email_sent.  I sent a
>>>test to multiple accounts from multiple domains, including a separate
>>>domain for multiple BCC's.  There is only 1 email saved in the notspam
>>>folder.
>>>
>>>This confirms my earlier message.  If Exchange is smart-relaying
>>>through ASSP, there should only be (1) message sent through ASSP.
>>>Once it hits back to the relay (virtual server), then it gets split
>>>off per-domain in the queues.
>>>
>>>Jeff, could you be confusing the multiple lines in the Mail Log that
>>>reflect each address that is being sent to?
>>>
>>>HTH
>>>
>>>
>>>On 7/26/05, Theo Aukerman <tau...@lo...> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I must admit that I don't know for sure that assp is not doing this.  My
>>>>answer assumed that since ASSP is a proxy, it would only pass through
>>>>the SMTP commands from exchange.
>>>>
>>>>After having tried this myself, I noticed that I get multiple copies of
>>>>the email in the "okmail" folder, so it is likely that my setup is
>>>>behaving the same as yours.
>>>>
>>>>I'll be looking into exchange settings in my spare time in the next few
>>>>days trying to prove (or not) that exchange is replicating the email.
>>>>
>>>>Theo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: ass...@li...
>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>>>Jeff Buehler
>>>>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:37 PM
>>>>>To: ass...@li...
>>>>>Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Theo -
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
>>>>>
>>>>>The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd
>>>>>(c/c++ app and
>>>>>very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA),
>>>>>which could
>>>>>handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is
>>>>>where the
>>>>>replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD
>>>>>(except for the
>>>>>Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
>>>>>normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
>>>>>load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
>>>>>that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
>>>>>Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>mail server
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
>>>>>>server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
>>>>>>server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
>>>>>>organization).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>and whatever
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>replicate the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>emails.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
>>>>>>proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
>>>>>>Destination to do the replicating.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
>>>>>>(what kind of server/software)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Theo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   *From:* ass...@li...
>>>>>>   [mailto:ass...@li...] *On
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>Behalf Of *Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   Buehler
>>>>>>   *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
>>>>>>   *To:* ass...@li...
>>>>>>   *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Hi Theo -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>from this one
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
>>>>>>   especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
>>>>>>   then one of the following occurs:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>(lets say
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
>>>>>>   100 emails)
>>>>>>   2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
>>>>>>   to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
>>>>>>   3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
>>>>>>   it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
>>>>>>   (clamsmtpd) service
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
>>>>>>   which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
>>>>>>   backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>load average
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
>>>>>>   anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
>>>>>>   anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
>>>>>>   to scan it for each user).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
>>>>>>   Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
>>>>>>   smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>"cloned" for each
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>   recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
>>>>>>   "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
>>>>>>   passing all that mail on...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Jeff
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Theo Aukerman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does do
>>>>>>
>>>>>>something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propagate
>>>>>>
>>>>>>using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
>>>>>>
>>>>>>notification to boot that something happened.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>reason.  The
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Theo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>From: ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jeff Buehler
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>To: ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi all -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much more
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>condensed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>and I don't
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>know about it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>Strategies
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click
>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=click>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>>      
>>>
>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&opclick
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Assp-user mailing list
>>>>Ass...@li...
>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>_______________________________________________
>>Assp-user mailing list
>>Ass...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>


-- 

	
	

	
	Buehler Technologies
19 Circle Drive - San Rafael, CA 94901
415.459.4677 - je...@bu...

	
	

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

We do a direct membership mailing.  One email must be sent to each
member individually.  We cannot have 13000 email addresses in the To:,
Cc:, or Bcc:...  That is an inappropriate way to send an official
mailing, and many anti-spam solutions would view such a distribution
to have a high probability for spam, and it pisses some ISP's off -
particularly AOL.

If properly configured, only (1) email would be processed by ASSP if
only (1) message was sent.  We send 13000 individual (yet duplicate in
everything except the To:) messages.

Look at the time stamps.  Even though a single email to multiple
people may show multiple log entries (a line in the log per address
sending to), all the time stamps are the same.  If you you look at
your notspam directory, you should only see (1) email saved that
relates to all those lines.  I have tested and confirmed this to be
true.

If the formula is:  Outlook -> MAPI -> Exchange -> smart host -> ASSP
-> Exchange -> SMTP virtual server...

ASSP will not see a single email get "replicated" or split before it.=20
If a single email is sent to multiple people, only a single email will
flow through ASSP.  The "replication" happens after.

Only when it is queued for delivery (SMTP virtual server) will there
be any "replication".

If your email is being "replicated" before ASSP, then your flow
formula is incorrect.


On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> Question - why do you have your huge mailing list send directly from
> Exchange?  Although there are 13,000 recipients, from what you are
> saying only 1 mail would be processed by ASSP, and the mail would be
> replicated by the final MTA.
>=20
> Also (since you brought it up!) why would the ASSP log be showing
> multiple instances of an email rather than just one?  It doesn't process
> on a per user basis, just on a per mail basis, right?
>=20
> The version of Exchange is 2003.  The version of Outlook is Office
> Outlook 2003 SP1.  And yes, this is via MAPI.  Version 1.1.1 of ASSP.
>=20
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>=20
> Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>=20
> >No, Exchange does not send 1000 copies to ASSP.  It is (supposed to
> >be) smart-relaying through ASSP to another SMTP server.  In the smart
> >relay situation, only the original email relays through.  It does not
> >get distributed or split in any fashion.
> >
> >Only after it hits the second SMTP server (the other end of the smart
> >relay) for final delivery does the message get split up into
> >individual queues.
> >
> >What version of Exchange?  What version of Outlook?  This is an
> >Outlook client sending through Exchange via MAPI (not SMTP/POP3) ?
> >
> >I have been using ASSP for years now, with Exchange 2000 and now 2003.
> > What you are describing so far should not be happening.  Something is
> >being misinterpreted, or is configured incorrectly.
> >
> >
> >On 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hi Michael -
> >>
> >>Queued per domain?  Do you mean that for each distinct domain you are
> >>seeing Exchange sending out a copy of the email as would be expected?
> >>If so, then this is the same behavior I'm talking about.
> >>
> >>If I have a mailing list of 1000 distinct addresses with distinct
> >>domains, then would or would not Exchange send to ASSP 1000 distinct
> >>emails for each of these recipients based on your findings below?
> >>
> >>This is not an issue pertaining to the logs - my user sent the mail out=
,
> >>and then my server struggled to keep up as hundreds of the same email
> >>were processed, one for each user being sent to, and then passed to my
> >>anti-virus scanner, which struggled with them, and then finally to my
> >>MTA.  This means that either Exchange sent an distinct copy of the emai=
l
> >>to each specified recipient, or that ASSP did.
> >>
> >>And of course, if we are talking about 100 distinct addresses, then
> >>there will be 100 distinct lines in the mail log, even if the email is
> >>otherwise exactly the same.
> >>
> >>Are we talking about the same thing?  It seems you think I am talking
> >>about the same mail to the same recipient being duplicated - I am not.
> >>I am talking about the same mail to distinct recipients being duplicate=
d
> >>(or replicated).  And this is a problem for me at the moment.
> >>
> >>Jeff
> >>
> >>Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>I just performed some tests.  In Exchange 2003 (and I am going to
> >>>assume the behavior is the same in previous versions, because I have
> >>>never had any reason to believe it wasn't), email is queued
> >>>per-domain.  The only way email gets split/replicated is if there are
> >>>multiple domains and/or BCC's.
> >>>
> >>>I just did it through ASSP, and that was the behavior.
> >>>
> >>>My "notspam" folder only has 1 email saved _per_email_sent.  I sent a
> >>>test to multiple accounts from multiple domains, including a separate
> >>>domain for multiple BCC's.  There is only 1 email saved in the notspam
> >>>folder.
> >>>
> >>>This confirms my earlier message.  If Exchange is smart-relaying
> >>>through ASSP, there should only be (1) message sent through ASSP.
> >>>Once it hits back to the relay (virtual server), then it gets split
> >>>off per-domain in the queues.
> >>>
> >>>Jeff, could you be confusing the multiple lines in the Mail Log that
> >>>reflect each address that is being sent to?
> >>>
> >>>HTH
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 7/26/05, Theo Aukerman <tau...@lo...> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>I must admit that I don't know for sure that assp is not doing this. =
 My
> >>>>answer assumed that since ASSP is a proxy, it would only pass through
> >>>>the SMTP commands from exchange.
> >>>>
> >>>>After having tried this myself, I noticed that I get multiple copies =
of
> >>>>the email in the "okmail" folder, so it is likely that my setup is
> >>>>behaving the same as yours.
> >>>>
> >>>>I'll be looking into exchange settings in my spare time in the next f=
ew
> >>>>days trying to prove (or not) that exchange is replicating the email.
> >>>>
> >>>>Theo
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>>From: ass...@li...
> >>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> >>>>>Jeff Buehler
> >>>>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:37 PM
> >>>>>To: ass...@li...
> >>>>>Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Hi Theo -
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Yes - Exchange sends to ASSP as a Smart Host.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The SMTP destination is a clamav proxy called clamsmtpd
> >>>>>(c/c++ app and
> >>>>>very lightweight) which then sends to XMail (a great MTA),
> >>>>>which could
> >>>>>handle 2000 times that load without even noticing.  XMail is
> >>>>>where the
> >>>>>replication should be happening.  This is all on FreeBSD
> >>>>>(except for the
> >>>>>Exchange server, of course) running an Athlon 2.1 GHz and 1 mb ram -
> >>>>>normal email volume of about 4000 emails per day don't even register
> >>>>>load except for occasionally ASSP and CLAMsmtpd.  If you are correct
> >>>>>that ASSP can not or will not do the replication, then it must be
> >>>>>Exchange that is doing it for some crappy Exchange type reason.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Do you know of a way to disable this in Exchange?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Thanks!
> >>>>>Jeff
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Well, if you send mail to multiple (external) users, some
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>mail server
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>in the chain must replicate the message and transmit it to the SMTP
> >>>>>>server for each targeted domain.  The hope would be that the mail
> >>>>>>server that does this would be the last one in the chain (in your
> >>>>>>organization).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>As far as assp goes, it acts as a proxy between exchange
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>and whatever
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>it is configured as its "SMTP Destination".  ASSP won't
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>replicate the
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>emails.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>You probably want exchange transmitting only 1 copy to assp, assp
> >>>>>>proxys the connection to "SMTP Destination" and  you want SMTP
> >>>>>>Destination to do the replicating.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Do you have exchange set up to send to assp as a "Smart Host"?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I forgot what you said you had at the "SMTP Destination" for ASSP
> >>>>>>(what kind of server/software)?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Theo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------=
--
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>--
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   *From:* ass...@li...
> >>>>>>   [mailto:ass...@li...] *On
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>Behalf Of *Jeff
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>   Buehler
> >>>>>>   *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:45 AM
> >>>>>>   *To:* ass...@li...
> >>>>>>   *Subject:* Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Hi Theo -
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Right.  I think my problem may be this - when a user
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>from this one
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>   organization sends out a list based email with lots of users,
> >>>>>>   especially a big one, it goes to the Exchange serve there, and
> >>>>>>   then one of the following occurs:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   1. every copy of the email is sent to ASSP by Exchange
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>(lets say
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>   there are 100 people on the list - ASSP then has to scan through
> >>>>>>   100 emails)
> >>>>>>   2. Exchange sends 1 copy of the mail to ASSP which then proceeds
> >>>>>>   to scan it for every user that it is going to be sent to
> >>>>>>   3. Exchange sends 1 copy of the email to ASSP, which then scans
> >>>>>>   it, and then sends a copy of it for every user to my anti-virus
> >>>>>>   (clamsmtpd) service
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Whichever one of the three above that is occurring (I don't know
> >>>>>>   which - I'm trying to figure that out) it is causing a big mail
> >>>>>>   backlog, seemingly at the ASSP/anti-virus level (the
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>load average
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>   for both go through the roof - either ASSP keeps sending to the
> >>>>>>   anti-virus scanner and backlogging it or both ASSP and the
> >>>>>>   anti-virus scanner are choking on the volume of mail as they try
> >>>>>>   to scan it for each user).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   So, does anyone know the mechanism that ASSP uses here?   Or
> >>>>>>   Exchange - does it send out a separate copy of each when using a
> >>>>>>   smart host?  Ideally I only want the mail to be
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>"cloned" for each
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>   recipient when it reaches my MTA, but right now it is being
> >>>>>>   "cloned" either by Exchange or ASSP for each recipient then
> >>>>>>   passing all that mail on...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Thanks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Jeff
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Theo Aukerman wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I scan all inbound and outbount mail.  That way if some user does d=
o
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>something dumb (like download and run some trojen that will propaga=
te
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>using SMTP), I get a chance to keep it from propagating.  And I get
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>notification to boot that something happened.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I also block SMTP from users out to the internet for this
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>reason.  The
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>only SMTP servers my users can talk to are the ones in my control.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Theo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>From: ass...@li...
> >>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>[mailto:ass...@li...] On Behalf Of
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Jeff Buehler
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:29 PM
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>To: ass...@li...
> >>>>>>><mailto:ass...@li...>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Subject: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Hi all -
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>This is related to the question I was asking earlier, but much mor=
e
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>condensed:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Why is the mail that local users send (from a trusted IP - relay
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>allowed) through ASSP scanned by ASSP at all other than for
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>whitelisting/isspam./notspam purposes?  Shouldn't there be a way t=
o
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>prevent this for the sake of performance?  Perhaps there is
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>and I don't
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>know about it?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Of course when a trusted user is the recipient the email should be
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>scanned, but why when they are the sender?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Jeff
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> >>>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>Strategies
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=3Dclick
> >>>>>><http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id%16492&op=3Dclick>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>>>><mailto:Ass...@li...>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration
> >>>>>Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> >>>>>straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get
> >>>>>everything you need to get up to speed, fast.
> >>>>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclick
> >>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategie=
s
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id=16492&opclick
> >>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>Assp-user mailing list
> >>>>Ass...@li...
> >>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> >>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> >>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> >>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dcl=
ick
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Assp-user mailing list
> >>Ass...@li...
> >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>=20
>=20
> --
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>        Buehler Technologies
> 19 Circle Drive - San Rafael, CA 94901
> 415.459.4677 - je...@bu...
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclic=
k
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[otherguy <oth...@ot...>]

It's very difficult to do ASSP > Exchange.

That's one of the things about Exchange.  Exchange doesn't behave  
like SMTP mail, so it has to go Exchange > ASSP.


-Cameron Wilhelm
oth...@ot...


On Jul 26, 2005, at 10:39 PM, bil...@gr... wrote:

> question for Jeff:
>
> What's the flow on your outgoing mail?  You probably already wrote  
> it in an earlier email, but y'all have been talking a lot and I  
> don't want to dig.
>
> The reason I ask is that I thought that outgoing mail should  
> generally be directed to ASSP first, then the mail server.
>
> If that was the case:
>
> User => assp => virus check => exchange => destination
>
> then ASSP would get a single mail, would it not?  Exchange or  
> whatever mta you're using would properly do the splitting up by  
> domain & BCCs.
>
>
> -- 
> Bill Christensen
> <http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>
>
> Green Building Professionals Directory: <http:// 
> directory.greenbuilder.com>
> Sustainable Building Calendar: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/calendar/>
> Green Real Estate: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/realestate/>
> Straw Bale Registry: <http://sbregistry.greenbuilder.com/>
> Books/videos/software: <http://bookstore.greenbuilder.com/>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

The flow is (for outbound mail from a known and trusted user base) is 
User -> Exchange -> ASSP -> CLAMsmtpd ->Xmail (MTA).  I also have a lot 
of users that don't use Exchange since I operate as a host, but they are 
not (presently) the problem.

The flow when mail comes into the same Exchange server from outside 
users is ASSP -> CLASMsmtpd -> XMail (MTA) -> Exchange -> User.

The problem is with outbound mail from trusted users.  Yes, I can have 
them send through Exchange directly.  Yes, I can have them send straight 
to the MTA (XMail).  But then they can't whitelist.  Yes, I can set up 
separate accounts that do this or that.  However, the second I allow 
them to whitelist by sending through ASSP, then the potential exists for 
the problem I am referring to in which a single mail to a large list is 
not processed by ASSP as a single mail but rather seperately for each 
user on the list, and also every mail that is sent to multiple users is 
being processed independently which bites from a performance standpoint.

I'm not clear as to why (ASSP or Exchange), or if this is appropriate, 
but that is what is happening, and it seems messed up to me.

Jeff



otherguy wrote:

> It's very difficult to do ASSP > Exchange.
>
> That's one of the things about Exchange.  Exchange doesn't behave  
> like SMTP mail, so it has to go Exchange > ASSP.
>
>
> -Cameron Wilhelm
> oth...@ot...
>
>
> On Jul 26, 2005, at 10:39 PM, bil...@gr... wrote:
>
>> question for Jeff:
>>
>> What's the flow on your outgoing mail?  You probably already wrote  
>> it in an earlier email, but y'all have been talking a lot and I  
>> don't want to dig.
>>
>> The reason I ask is that I thought that outgoing mail should  
>> generally be directed to ASSP first, then the mail server.
>>
>> If that was the case:
>>
>> User => assp => virus check => exchange => destination
>>
>> then ASSP would get a single mail, would it not?  Exchange or  
>> whatever mta you're using would properly do the splitting up by  
>> domain & BCCs.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Bill Christensen
>> <http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>
>>
>> Green Building Professionals Directory: <http:// 
>> directory.greenbuilder.com>
>> Sustainable Building Calendar: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/calendar/>
>> Green Real Estate: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/realestate/>
>> Straw Bale Registry: <http://sbregistry.greenbuilder.com/>
>> Books/videos/software: <http://bookstore.greenbuilder.com/>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>> _______________________________________________
>> Assp-user mailing list
>> Ass...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[<bil...@gr...>]

At 10:10 PM -0700 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler wrote:
>The flow is (for outbound mail from a known and trusted user base) 
>is User -> Exchange -> ASSP -> CLAMsmtpd ->Xmail (MTA).  I also have 
>a lot of users that don't use Exchange since I operate as a host, 
>but they are not (presently) the problem.
>
>The flow when mail comes into the same Exchange server from outside 
>users is ASSP -> CLASMsmtpd -> XMail (MTA) -> Exchange -> User.


Ok.  I am not familiar with the internal workings of Exchange, but is 
there some reason that the outgoing flow doesn't go directly to ASSP 
and bypass Exchange entirely on that leg of the journey?  That would 
result in a single email getting to Xmail, and then splitting to the 
various destinations from there. And all addresses would get 
whitelisted.

Is there some reason that it *has* to go out through Exchange?

I'm certain it's Exchange that is turning it into multiple emails.

>The problem is with outbound mail from trusted users.  Yes, I can 
>have them send through Exchange directly.  Yes, I can have them send 
>straight to the MTA (XMail).  But then they can't whitelist.  Yes, I 
>can set up separate accounts that do this or that.  However, the 
>second I allow them to whitelist by sending through ASSP, then the 
>potential exists for the problem I am referring to in which a single 
>mail to a large list is not processed by ASSP as a single mail but 
>rather seperately for each user on the list, and also every mail 
>that is sent to multiple users is being processed independently 
>which bites from a performance standpoint.

-- 
Bill Christensen
<http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>

Green Building Professionals Directory: <http://directory.greenbuilder.com>
Sustainable Building Calendar: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/calendar/>
Green Real Estate: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/realestate/>
Straw Bale Registry: <http://sbregistry.greenbuilder.com/>
Books/videos/software: <http://bookstore.greenbuilder.com/>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

The users in this case are all part of an Active Directory group - I 
would have to break things apart a bit to get their Outlook to send 
straight to ASSP rather than through Exchange.  It would prevent users 
from having access to the "Exchange features" like mail persistence, 
calender, contacts, etc, or at least I think it would.  Minimally there 
would be no way for the Exchange server to do its LDAP thing and store 
the "sent" mail on the server itself.  So this wouldn't really work, I 
don't think, but it's an interesting thought.

I am going to start looking at the code when I have time and see if I 
can figure out a secure way to allow local trusted users to send through 
ASSP without processing other than for whitelisting and reporting 
spam/notspam.  I can't think of any other way to handle this, unless I 
can find a "switch" in Exchange that will allow me to force it to pass 
the mail as a single entity to be replicated later.  It bugs me having 
to process multiple instances of the same locally sent mail for every 
recipient - it's almost like SPAM!

Thanks...

Jeff

bil...@gr... wrote:

> At 10:10 PM -0700 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler wrote:
>
>> The flow is (for outbound mail from a known and trusted user base) is 
>> User -> Exchange -> ASSP -> CLAMsmtpd ->Xmail (MTA).  I also have a 
>> lot of users that don't use Exchange since I operate as a host, but 
>> they are not (presently) the problem.
>>
>> The flow when mail comes into the same Exchange server from outside 
>> users is ASSP -> CLASMsmtpd -> XMail (MTA) -> Exchange -> User.
>
>
>
> Ok.  I am not familiar with the internal workings of Exchange, but is 
> there some reason that the outgoing flow doesn't go directly to ASSP 
> and bypass Exchange entirely on that leg of the journey?  That would 
> result in a single email getting to Xmail, and then splitting to the 
> various destinations from there. And all addresses would get whitelisted.
>
> Is there some reason that it *has* to go out through Exchange?
>
> I'm certain it's Exchange that is turning it into multiple emails.
>
>> The problem is with outbound mail from trusted users.  Yes, I can 
>> have them send through Exchange directly.  Yes, I can have them send 
>> straight to the MTA (XMail).  But then they can't whitelist.  Yes, I 
>> can set up separate accounts that do this or that.  However, the 
>> second I allow them to whitelist by sending through ASSP, then the 
>> potential exists for the problem I am referring to in which a single 
>> mail to a large list is not processed by ASSP as a single mail but 
>> rather seperately for each user on the list, and also every mail that 
>> is sent to multiple users is being processed independently which 
>> bites from a performance standpoint.
>
>


-- 

	
	

	
	Buehler Technologies
19 Circle Drive - San Rafael, CA 94901
415.459.4677 - je...@bu...

	
	

RE: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Dave B. <db...@at...>]

Jeff,

If you have a firewall can you port forward to the correct port?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ass...@li... [mailto:assp-user-
> ad...@li...] On Behalf Of Jeff Buehler
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:57 AM
> To: ass...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
> 
> The users in this case are all part of an Active Directory group - I
> would have to break things apart a bit to get their Outlook to send
> straight to ASSP rather than through Exchange.  It would prevent users
> from having access to the "Exchange features" like mail persistence,
> calender, contacts, etc, or at least I think it would.  Minimally there
> would be no way for the Exchange server to do its LDAP thing and store
> the "sent" mail on the server itself.  So this wouldn't really work, I
> don't think, but it's an interesting thought.
> 
> I am going to start looking at the code when I have time and see if I
> can figure out a secure way to allow local trusted users to send through
> ASSP without processing other than for whitelisting and reporting
> spam/notspam.  I can't think of any other way to handle this, unless I
> can find a "switch" in Exchange that will allow me to force it to pass
> the mail as a single entity to be replicated later.  It bugs me having
> to process multiple instances of the same locally sent mail for every
> recipient - it's almost like SPAM!
> 
> Thanks...
> 
> Jeff
> 
> bil...@gr... wrote:
> 
> > At 10:10 PM -0700 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler wrote:
> >
> >> The flow is (for outbound mail from a known and trusted user base) is
> >> User -> Exchange -> ASSP -> CLAMsmtpd ->Xmail (MTA).  I also have a
> >> lot of users that don't use Exchange since I operate as a host, but
> >> they are not (presently) the problem.
> >>
> >> The flow when mail comes into the same Exchange server from outside
> >> users is ASSP -> CLASMsmtpd -> XMail (MTA) -> Exchange -> User.
> >
> >
> >
> > Ok.  I am not familiar with the internal workings of Exchange, but is
> > there some reason that the outgoing flow doesn't go directly to ASSP
> > and bypass Exchange entirely on that leg of the journey?  That would
> > result in a single email getting to Xmail, and then splitting to the
> > various destinations from there. And all addresses would get
> whitelisted.
> >
> > Is there some reason that it *has* to go out through Exchange?
> >
> > I'm certain it's Exchange that is turning it into multiple emails.
> >
> >> The problem is with outbound mail from trusted users.  Yes, I can
> >> have them send through Exchange directly.  Yes, I can have them send
> >> straight to the MTA (XMail).  But then they can't whitelist.  Yes, I
> >> can set up separate accounts that do this or that.  However, the
> >> second I allow them to whitelist by sending through ASSP, then the
> >> potential exists for the problem I am referring to in which a single
> >> mail to a large list is not processed by ASSP as a single mail but
> >> rather seperately for each user on the list, and also every mail that
> >> is sent to multiple users is being processed independently which
> >> bites from a performance standpoint.
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 	Buehler Technologies
> 19 Circle Drive - San Rafael, CA 94901
> 415.459.4677 - je...@bu...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Jeff B. <je...@bu...>]

Hi Dave ,

Hmmm - I am not firewalling my server via ipfw at the moment.  It is 
behind a hardware router with simple port firewalling so it hasn't been 
strictly necessary.  How would this help, though?  I could port forward 
based on IP since my Exchange users are at a known static IP, but then 
my users from the Exchange server couldn't whitelist or report good/bad 
spam.  I would have to do some sort of packet inspection, compare the 
findings against the previous packets, and if they were the same 
(duplicate mail) then port forward at that point, or something like 
that, wouldn't I?

Jeff

Dave Beckstrom wrote:

>Jeff,
>
>If you have a firewall can you port forward to the correct port?
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: ass...@li... [mailto:assp-user-
>>ad...@li...] On Behalf Of Jeff Buehler
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:57 AM
>>To: ass...@li...
>>Subject: Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving
>>
>>The users in this case are all part of an Active Directory group - I
>>would have to break things apart a bit to get their Outlook to send
>>straight to ASSP rather than through Exchange.  It would prevent users
>>from having access to the "Exchange features" like mail persistence,
>>calender, contacts, etc, or at least I think it would.  Minimally there
>>would be no way for the Exchange server to do its LDAP thing and store
>>the "sent" mail on the server itself.  So this wouldn't really work, I
>>don't think, but it's an interesting thought.
>>
>>I am going to start looking at the code when I have time and see if I
>>can figure out a secure way to allow local trusted users to send through
>>ASSP without processing other than for whitelisting and reporting
>>spam/notspam.  I can't think of any other way to handle this, unless I
>>can find a "switch" in Exchange that will allow me to force it to pass
>>the mail as a single entity to be replicated later.  It bugs me having
>>to process multiple instances of the same locally sent mail for every
>>recipient - it's almost like SPAM!
>>
>>Thanks...
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>bil...@gr... wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>At 10:10 PM -0700 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>The flow is (for outbound mail from a known and trusted user base) is
>>>>User -> Exchange -> ASSP -> CLAMsmtpd ->Xmail (MTA).  I also have a
>>>>lot of users that don't use Exchange since I operate as a host, but
>>>>they are not (presently) the problem.
>>>>
>>>>The flow when mail comes into the same Exchange server from outside
>>>>users is ASSP -> CLASMsmtpd -> XMail (MTA) -> Exchange -> User.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>Ok.  I am not familiar with the internal workings of Exchange, but is
>>>there some reason that the outgoing flow doesn't go directly to ASSP
>>>and bypass Exchange entirely on that leg of the journey?  That would
>>>result in a single email getting to Xmail, and then splitting to the
>>>various destinations from there. And all addresses would get
>>>      
>>>
>>whitelisted.
>>    
>>
>>>Is there some reason that it *has* to go out through Exchange?
>>>
>>>I'm certain it's Exchange that is turning it into multiple emails.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>The problem is with outbound mail from trusted users.  Yes, I can
>>>>have them send through Exchange directly.  Yes, I can have them send
>>>>straight to the MTA (XMail).  But then they can't whitelist.  Yes, I
>>>>can set up separate accounts that do this or that.  However, the
>>>>second I allow them to whitelist by sending through ASSP, then the
>>>>potential exists for the problem I am referring to in which a single
>>>>mail to a large list is not processed by ASSP as a single mail but
>>>>rather seperately for each user on the list, and also every mail that
>>>>is sent to multiple users is being processed independently which
>>>>bites from a performance standpoint.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>--
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>	Buehler Technologies
>>19 Circle Drive - San Rafael, CA 94901
>>415.459.4677 - je...@bu...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>>_______________________________________________
>>Assp-user mailing list
>>Ass...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
>from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
>informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
>speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
>_______________________________________________
>Assp-user mailing list
>Ass...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>
>  
>

Re: [Assp-user] local users sending vs. receiving

[Micheal E. Jr <mic...@gm...>]

As I understand it, all that is going on for local users is whitelist,
notspam, and AV (if enabled).  This still requires processing, but not
as much as what happens inbound.

On 7/27/05, Jeff Buehler <je...@bu...> wrote:
> The users in this case are all part of an Active Directory group - I
> would have to break things apart a bit to get their Outlook to send
> straight to ASSP rather than through Exchange.  It would prevent users
> from having access to the "Exchange features" like mail persistence,
> calender, contacts, etc, or at least I think it would.  Minimally there
> would be no way for the Exchange server to do its LDAP thing and store
> the "sent" mail on the server itself.  So this wouldn't really work, I
> don't think, but it's an interesting thought.
>=20
> I am going to start looking at the code when I have time and see if I
> can figure out a secure way to allow local trusted users to send through
> ASSP without processing other than for whitelisting and reporting
> spam/notspam.  I can't think of any other way to handle this, unless I
> can find a "switch" in Exchange that will allow me to force it to pass
> the mail as a single entity to be replicated later.  It bugs me having
> to process multiple instances of the same locally sent mail for every
> recipient - it's almost like SPAM!
>=20
> Thanks...
>=20
> Jeff
>=20
> bil...@gr... wrote:
>=20
> > At 10:10 PM -0700 7/26/05, Jeff Buehler wrote:
> >
> >> The flow is (for outbound mail from a known and trusted user base) is
> >> User -> Exchange -> ASSP -> CLAMsmtpd ->Xmail (MTA).  I also have a
> >> lot of users that don't use Exchange since I operate as a host, but
> >> they are not (presently) the problem.
> >>
> >> The flow when mail comes into the same Exchange server from outside
> >> users is ASSP -> CLASMsmtpd -> XMail (MTA) -> Exchange -> User.
> >
> >
> >
> > Ok.  I am not familiar with the internal workings of Exchange, but is
> > there some reason that the outgoing flow doesn't go directly to ASSP
> > and bypass Exchange entirely on that leg of the journey?  That would
> > result in a single email getting to Xmail, and then splitting to the
> > various destinations from there. And all addresses would get whiteliste=
d.
> >
> > Is there some reason that it *has* to go out through Exchange?
> >
> > I'm certain it's Exchange that is turning it into multiple emails.
> >
> >> The problem is with outbound mail from trusted users.  Yes, I can
> >> have them send through Exchange directly.  Yes, I can have them send
> >> straight to the MTA (XMail).  But then they can't whitelist.  Yes, I
> >> can set up separate accounts that do this or that.  However, the
> >> second I allow them to whitelist by sending through ASSP, then the
> >> potential exists for the problem I am referring to in which a single
> >> mail to a large list is not processed by ASSP as a single mail but
> >> rather seperately for each user on the list, and also every mail that
> >> is sent to multiple users is being processed independently which
> >> bites from a performance standpoint.
> >
> >
>=20
>=20
> --
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>        Buehler Technologies
> 19 Circle Drive - San Rafael, CA 94901
> 415.459.4677 - je...@bu...
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D7477&alloc_id=3D16492&op=3Dclic=
k
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-user mailing list
> Ass...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
>=20


--=20
ME2  <http://www.santeriasys.net/>