Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 07:54:00 -0600 From: Len Conrad <LConrad@Go2France.com> To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Request pointers to current-generation SMP boards Message-ID: <6.0.1.1.2.20031204073753.0494c1a0@mail.go2france.com> In-Reply-To: <20031203164252.B30624@mikea.ath.cx> References: <20031203164252.B30624@mikea.ath.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>I hope to talk the boss into something that is _really_ muscular, in
>hope that the rising tide of spam, worms, etc., won't swamp the poor
>thing after 6 months to a year.
Have the MX machine reject based on the envelope info, which will stop 90+%
of the spam. You don't need a very powerful box as MX to do envelope rejection
Then pass the remainder to a box much less powerful than you imagine for
content-scanning.
What volume of msgs do you have today? 100K? 500K msgs?
here's the stats for yesterday:
Grand Totals
------------
messages
186580 received
26185 delivered
0 forwarded
109 deferred (199 deferrals)
252 bounced
199942 rejected (88%)
.... for an MX machine that is 330 MHz, 256 MB RAM, one ATA33 disk.
%uptime
7:59AM up 35 days, 9:56, 1 user, load averages: 0.84, 0.36, 0.18
The .84 is due to a lot of hourly maillog scanning done by reporting
programs in the last 10 minutes of the hour (ie, not mail relaying
activity). The .18 is a more accurate indication of the load.
So you can see that scanning 26k mgs received vs the 200K rejected is huge
difference in volume, with a huge reduction in the requirements for
expensive content-scanning.
Note the 26K is really about 19K inbound and 7k outbound, meaning the
content-scanning would only look at the 19K.
Len
_____________________________________________________________________
http://MenAndMice.com/DNS-training: Orlando; San Jose
IMGate.MEIway.com: anti-spam gateway, effective on 1000's of sites, free
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6.0.1.1.2.20031204073753.0494c1a0>