vBulletin Search Engine Optimization
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| eric wrote: >On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 12:51:35 -0500, Todd T. Fries proclaimed... > > > >>consider instead running spamd on one machine (a firewall) in front of >>your mailservers. >> >>Nothing says spamd must be run on a mail server. >> >> > >In opposition of that point, it's tough to do when MX'ers are geographically >spread out through various locations. I've found that using scp(1) and >copying the spamd(8) database works well. > > Hi, I have been thinking of doing this on a simple, semi scalable way... It's not real time, and will not have 100% consistancey between clients, but it will be trivial to implement. My "clients" are spread over the country...so might be interesting to get a variety of different mail servers added to the white list... I was going to keep a central "authoritative" spamd system. All the other systems would be clients... The first implementation was just going to be the clients sending an email on a periodic basis to the "main" server. It could be as simple as a cron job... spamdb | grep '^WHITE|' | mail -s"spamdb for `uname -n` at `date`" spamd_user@my_central_host.com The central host would receive the email, and maybe by procmail, process the email & update it's spamdb tables. Then, the central mail host would REPLY to the email with the final spamdb output. This would propogate changes from other clients back to the originating client. Advantage: It's pretty trivial to set up, I could probably do it in under 1 hour. It is initiated by the client. There are no changes required on the central server when a new client is deployed... The only catch is that all the clients will NOT be in sync... but they will be close if the update frequency is say 1/hr.. and for the WHITE list of spamdb, I figured that was good enough! Security would need to be addressed, perhaps by using Sendmail's "access.db" on the central server, maybe combined with procmail, but that is a first thought off the top of my head.. The clients could be made smarter so they only sent the "new" records... or an empty set if they just wanted the updates from the main server. It is kind of a hack, but why use a sledgehammer to drive in a tack! Cheers, Steve |