Body Checksum Calculation

Dave Lugo dlugo@etherboy.com
Mon Apr 1 23:18:18 UTC 2002


On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Tony L. Svanstrom wrote:

>
>  What I forgot to write was that I haven't had enough time to really "evaluate
> the nature of DCC" (not sure how to put it), so what I wrote was more thoughts
> than what I considered "facts".
>
>  The problem is that if you're trying to apply DCC to a situation where the
> end-user isn't aware of what is being used and why, then the crucial white-
> list part isn't available; and based on the fact that the average user is an
> idiot it can't easily be added (not unless you don't mind long support-sessions
> via e-mail every time a user suspects he's not getting enough e-mails, and
> every time a user isn't getting enough e-mails).
>

I'm faced with a similar situation for my vanity domains.  I've worked out
a solution that will work for me, but I don't know how well it would apply
to your environment:

  . rejected items are logged to per-recipient dirs
  . users can 'browse' the past week or 14 days worth
    of rejected items, and add (via html gui), derived
    whitelist entries.
  . users can also forward items from the 'holding' area
    to thier normal mailbox.
  . crontab'd purging of old items from the log dir.

The above at least allows users to look for 'missing' DCC-threshhold
reaching items, and add whitelist entries to prevent future similar
items from being blocked.

Hope this helps,

Dave

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------
Dave Lugo   dlugo@etherboy.com    LC Unit #260   TINLC
Have you hugged your firewall today?   No spam, thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------
Are you the police?  . . . .  No ma'am, we're sysadmins.




More information about the DCC mailing list

Contact vjs@rhyolite.com by mail or use the form.