turetzsr Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Hi, all, ...About two hours ago, I forwarded (as attachment) some spam for parsing but have received no reply and there is no "Report Now" link on the web page. Is anyone else experiencing turnaround in excess of two hours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Going to repeat one of my earlier posts, point once again to the daily at http://www.spamcop.net/spamgraph.shtml?spamstats ... it doesn't appear that the IronPort folks have got the main system talking nice yet. Although also noting that "we" have no idea what is actually being tracked/displayed in these graphs, and that "we" know that some of those items have changed in the past .... there is enough 'history' involved to show that things are not yet running smoothly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted September 19, 2005 Author Share Posted September 19, 2005 Going to repeat one of my earlier posts, point once again to the daily at http://www.spamcop.net/spamgraph.shtml?spamstats ... it doesn't appear that the IronPort folks have got the main system talking nice yet. Although also noting that "we" have no idea what is actually being tracked/displayed in these graphs, and that "we" know that some of those items have changed in the past .... there is enough 'history' involved to show that things are not yet running smoothly.32915[/snapback] ...Thanks, Wazoo. ...What would it look like if things were "running smoothly?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 http://www.spamcop.net/spamstats.shtml includes the following in describing the graph contents ... These graphs show the number of messages submitted as spam along with the number of reports consumated regarding those messages. This data reflects more about SpamCop's usage patterns than it does about the spam. These numbers now reflect only a small fraction of total spam being processed by SpamCop, but they are still representative of the total. There is a rhythm to the submittal flow ... what is presently showing in the daily graph isn't 'normal' ... looking at weekly stats, week 35 would be more of the 'norm' .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted September 19, 2005 Author Share Posted September 19, 2005 <snip> There is a rhythm to the submittal flow ... what is presently showing in the daily graph isn't 'normal' ... looking at weekly stats, week 35 would be more of the 'norm' .... 32917[/snapback] ...Ah, okay. It looks like we haven't had too many "normal" days recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 ...Ah, okay. It looks like we haven't had too many "normal" days recently. 32918[/snapback] Pointing back to another post of mine ... http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...indpost&p=32848 ... and now noting that I couldn't find this Topic under the Reporting Forum ... moving it to that location ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Going to repeat one of my earlier posts, point once again to the daily at http://www.spamcop.net/spamgraph.shtml?spamstats ... it doesn't appear that the IronPort folks have got the main system talking nice yet.32915[/snapback] Right. Using the estimated calibration of five minutes per bar and two bars per pixel, it appears that there were four five-minute complete disruptions around 14:50, 18:15, 20:00, and 23:40, and four significant dips at 17:45, 20:50, 22:30, and 03:45 (all in the past 24 hours EDT -0400, the last dip for half an hour). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted September 19, 2005 Author Share Posted September 19, 2005 Hi, all, ...About two hours ago, I forwarded (as attachment) some spam for parsing but have received no reply and there is no "Report Now" link on the web page. Is anyone else experiencing turnaround in excess of two hours? 32914[/snapback] ...Looks like the intermittent problem where SpamCop parser chokes on one of the spams and just doesn't go any further (I presume because MS Exchange is mangling headers). I have been submitting (and re-submitting prior reported) spams via e-mail and am now getting replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted September 19, 2005 Author Share Posted September 19, 2005 ...Looks like the intermittent problem where SpamCop parser chokes on one of the spams and just doesn't go any further (I presume because MS Exchange is mangling headers). I have been submitting (and re-submitting prior reported) spams via e-mail and am now getting replies.32934[/snapback] ...But the interval between my sending the e-mail with the spam and the availability of the "Report Now" button is increasing, closing most lately on 2 1/2 hours or so.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbiel Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Remember that there has STILL BEEN NO response / reply from anyone in authority as a followup to the original announcements that there was a problem and this is why the announcements still appear at the head of every forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted September 19, 2005 Author Share Posted September 19, 2005 Remember that there has STILL BEEN NO response / reply from anyone in authority as a followup to the original announcements that there was a problem and this is why the announcements still appear at the head of every forum32967[/snapback] ...That factoid would impress me more if there were consistent history of problems being fixed and the fix announced in the Announcements forum. Not that I'm complaining -- I'd rather have things fixed and not announced than vice-versa. <g> ...The last information from a user (which is often the only way we hear that a problem has been fixed) was Farelf's post in thread "Report Now link still broken??", that "As at the edit date-time [sep 17 2005, 01:49 PM {EDT?}] email turnaround down to 35 secs, as good as it ever gets for me. Back to normal for all intents & purposes?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Guessing, imagination mode needed ... based on http://www.spamcop.net/spamgraph.shtml?spamstats 0335 - system knocked down to a single server 0415 - one more server reloaded and brought back up 0435 - another server brought back on-line 0500 - another server brought on-line -started backlog catch-up 0530 - reboot of one or two systems 0600 - working on backlog 0800 - problems - another reboot 0900 - east coast U.S. starts the Monday morning submit flood 1400 - system choking on something again ... servers taken off-line 1600 - still wrestling with system loads on various servers, still choked on backlog Personal opinion ... the 'golden' code was lost and a team of folks is involved in trying to handle a dozen different issues at the same time ... networking folks stumbling over programmer types, database issues being created/resolved by the up/down of additional system hardware items ..... just my opinion .... Lest one forgets .. Farelf is 'special' <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Current turnaround here in the Antipodes at +0800 and the end of ten thousand miles of copper and fiber/fibre (depending where you went to school) is 31 minutes - you've probably called it right Wazoo, it's been up and down for sure. Incidentally, we're all special (at 2^n per n generations, you do the math as to how long ago the then contemporary set of your direct ancestors outnumbered the population of the Earth if they *weren't* interbreeding - bro). Actually the antipodean point for a suburban West Aussie such as myself is pretty much the Bermuda Triangle. Coincidence - I think not. Also, one special thing, I once worked for GOD. That's what he reckoned, but I think he might have been a little dyslexic (else my prospects in the afterlife aren't looking good). [Added] And back down to 6½ minutes as at the date-time of the edit. Up and down, in and out, reminds me of something, if only I could remember ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Also, one special thing, I once worked for GOD. That's what he reckoned, but I think he might have been a little dyslexic (else my prospects in the afterlife aren't looking good). 32973[/snapback] Heh, here in the US there's a delivery service with "GOD" emblazoned on their trucks - it stands for "Guaranteed Overnight Delivery". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Starting around 12 hours ago there have been substantial delays in processing emailed submissions - viz: Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (vmx1.spamcop.net [204.15.82.27]) by sc-app2.soma.ironport.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C3FD54F7 for <submit.xxxxxxxxxxxx [at] spam.spamcop.net>; Thu, 6 Oct 2005 10:21:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out4.prserv.net (HELO prserv.net) (32.97.166.34) by vmx1.spamcop.net with ESMTP; 06 Oct 2005 09:03:06 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (slip-xxx-xxx-xxx-xxx.sy.au.prserv.net[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]) by attglobal.net (out4) with ESMTP id <2005100616025120405936r8e>; Thu, 6 Oct 2005 16:02:52 +0000 Around 1 hour 20 minutes in this instance. Currently 1 hour 30+ and waiting ... spamstats look unexceptional. Paste-in submissions normal. [Added - got "Unreported spam saved" in my member's page after total delay of around 2 hours 30. Confirmation email still not received.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbiel Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Is it possible the delays are related to the receipt of the confirmation email? I sent several (forward as attachement from outlook express). 2 hours later no confirmation email but they are available to report by logging into the reporting window. Will wait to see what happens. and will run further tests later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Is it possible the delays are related to the receipt of the confirmation email? ... 33823[/snapback] Perhaps ... The missing confirmation has arrived, tracking back - it took 30 minutes for AT&T to get it to my inbox, 3 hours to get from spamcop to prserv, a bit of time travel between ironport and spamcop (-4 sec) around 1 minute for spamcop processing, 3 hours from spamcop to ironport and 29 seconds from my desk to spamcop. The "Unreported spam" message was available (I'm sure) after 2 hours +, as reported previously but less than 3 hours, I thought - but that doesn't seem to add up with the data. I'd better paste the data, hoping I munge all that needs it and Wazoo's little " [at] " thing works in a codebox. Am I interpreting the timings correctly? From - Fri Oct 07 15:56:05 2005 X-UIDL: 20051007072712106030nkoie001da5 X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net ([204.15.82.27]) by prserv.net (in6) with SMTP id <200510070727111060caomlke>; Fri, 7 Oct 2005 07:27:11 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [204.15.82.27] Received: from sc-app1.ironport.com (HELO spamcop.net) (204.15.82.20) by vmx1.spamcop.net with SMTP; 06 Oct 2005 21:21:25 -0700 From: SpamCop AutoResponder <spamcop[at]devnull.spamcop.net> To: x Subject: SpamCop has accepted 9 emails for processing Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 04:21:29 GMT Message-ID: <spamid812856279[at]msgid.spamcop.net> Content-type: text/plain In-Reply-To: <4345CCAA.2000105[at]attglobal.net> References: <4345CCAA.2000105[at]attglobal.net> X-NAS-Language: English X-NAS-Bayes: #0: 2.90397E-175; #1: 1 X-NAS-Classification: 0 X-NAS-MessageID: 5550 X-NAS-Validation: {8A376B19-997C-4E0C-971E-7C8D51184801} PLEASE HELP SUPPORT THIS SERVICE! SpamCop is free. However, if you like the service please pay for it: [url="http://www.spamcop.net/upgradeaccount.shtml"]http://www.spamcop.net/upgradeaccount.shtml[/url] SpamCop is now ready to process your spam. Use links to finish spam reporting (members use cookie-login please!): [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856279z032138b0a5f6813feb9aad52b81fb373z"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856279z03...9aad52b81fb373z[/url] [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856280z606c576f546de1451bebc11b5d0979f7z"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856280z60...ebc11b5d0979f7z[/url] [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856281z2af6a90daf3b5d17fa4c98002400e894z"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856281z2a...4c98002400e894z[/url] [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856284z4a28369dc51dad5889b7dd27b4f006cez"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856284z4a...b7dd27b4f006cez[/url] [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856286ze7e2450a9c87368ba6930bbc7df00dbfz"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856286ze7...930bbc7df00dbfz[/url] [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856287z2b2064f8d6bdc1abb3692f3728fb7c38z"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856287z2b...692f3728fb7c38z[/url] [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856289zc0bb7add477f45657ad77ddf32d3cd8az"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856289zc0...d77ddf32d3cd8az[/url] [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856290z5cbf39a614243cedbfed3fd73509f667z"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856290z5c...ed3fd73509f667z[/url] [url="http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856291za89210c96d7b406e21cbe723e5e05d8az"]http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z812856291za8...cbe723e5e05d8az[/url] The email which triggered this auto-response had the following headers: Return-Path: <x> Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (vmx1.spamcop.net [204.15.82.27]) by sc-app1.soma.ironport.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 245B81A6E5 for <submit.x[at]spam.spamcop.net>; Thu, 6 Oct 2005 21:20:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kcout02.prserv.net (12.154.55.32) by vmx1.spamcop.net with ESMTP; 06 Oct 2005 18:17:59 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (slip-202-135-202-129.sy.au.prserv.net[202.135.202.129](untrusted sender)) by prserv.net (kcout02) with ESMTP id <2005100701173620200otaiue>; Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:17:37 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [202.135.202.129] Message-ID: <4345CCAA.2000105[at]attglobal.net> Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 09:17:30 +0800 From: x <x> Reply-To: x <x> Organization: Denis D. McDermott (International) Pty. Ltd. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050414 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SpamCop <submit.x[at]spam.spamcop.net> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------070107070007000707090803" Subject: [Fwd: Confidential business proposal] Converting the various date/times, in sequence, into GMT - noting a bit of time travel between ironport and spamcop - fix your clocks whoever it is: Fri 7 Oct 05 07:56:05 Fri 7 Oct 05 07:27:11 Fri 7 Oct 05 04:21:25 Fri 7 Oct 05 04:21:29 Fri 7 Oct 05 04:20:12 Fri 7 Oct 05 01:17:59 Fri 7 Oct 05 01:17:37 Fri 7 Oct 05 01:17:30 [update - just submitted another batch, by email. This time the "Unreported spam" message came up within just a minute or two (normal) instead of several hours. No confirmation email though - after ?15 mins. Seems to be several factors involved, AT&T could be the problem in one or all. If others aren't seeing these delays - or if other AT&T users are having a similar experience - that would clinch it.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted October 7, 2005 Author Share Posted October 7, 2005 <snip> [update - just submitted another batch, by email. This time the "Unreported spam" message came up within just a minute or two (normal) instead of several hours. No confirmation email though - after ?15 mins. Seems to be several factors involved, AT&T could be the problem in one or all. If others aren't seeing these delays - or if other AT&T users are having a similar experience - that would clinch it.] 33828[/snapback] ...FWIW, I have also been experiencing similar behavior (relatively quick availability of "Report Now" on web page, one-to-three-hour delays in confirmation e-mail from SpamCop to reach my InBox) pretty much all this past week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Thanks Steve, yes worth knowing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted October 7, 2005 Author Share Posted October 7, 2005 ...Getting better -- confirmation e-mail just came back in less than two minutes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 Yep, I'm just now seeing 2 mins from submission to SpamCop handing the confirmation back to AT&T -which is then taking another 34-35 mins to drop it into my mailbox. But submission is available after that 2 mins (huge improvement). Seems like AT&T is "struggling, but getting better", at least on some days/phases of the moon. Thanks for the feedback Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 at least on some days/phases of the moon.33848[/snapback] Don't discount "moon" theories. I had a documented case some years ago in which the wiring for a leased line ran under a very low bridge over seawater, had its insulation stripped, decayed, or otherwise compromised, and regularly shorted out during periods of high tide, which happen about twice a day when the moon passes closest to and farthest from any particular location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbiel Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 Email Confirmations of spam forwarded as attachement seem to be back to normal for me at this point in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 Email Confirmations of spam forwarded as attachement seem to be back to normal for me at this point in time. 33856[/snapback] I can confirm that - 4 min 39 from go to woah right now. Don't discount "moon" theories.Nice - I will remember that instance Jeff. Was thinking of the "no-one is responsible" aspect, being a touch sardonic (old cartoon comes to mind - computer hardware, software, telecoms, moon and astrology progressively blamed) but how delightful the moon really does play a part sometimes. But I am backing my world view that Venus ascending in the house of Aries. has yet to be reliably correlated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.