Scalix Forums

Maybe I'm being dumb, or maybe I've been spoilt in the past, but I can't get a combination of message rules do do as I wish. I have multiple email accounts that I need to access, my primary work one is in Outlook for all the other features, and rules setup in that *seem* to be doing the job, however I also have a personal domain/email account, and two common accounts. These I access via IMAP in Thunderbird.

Now, I get a lot of email, and I use a lot of filters to move email into different subfolders, eg on recipient address, mailing list subjects, and of course Spam. But, the rules seem to be double processing, for example, I have a filter that says put Spam in the SPAM folder, and another that says put anything addressed to Enquiries@ in the Enquiries folder, except I keep finding mail that triggers the Spam filter in the Enquiries box, yet the Spam filter is working. Looking at it it appears that mails are actually being duplicated, ie a copy is going to each folder, this is bad btw, and I've definately ticked the move, not copy rule.

Now, the web based rules seem inflexible (for example I tried to counter this by changing the Enquiries@ rule to something along the lines of addressed to Enquiries@ and not Spam, but I can't do this on headers or subject), and doesn't allow any form of ordering, or prioritising od rules. So, desperate act, I've made the email only accounts premium, and put them into Outlook profiles, created the rules from there, and then deleted the Outlook profiles so just in Thunderbird. I *think* this has worked, but obviosuly that's a terrible idea long term as just discovered I can't edit those rules without getting the account back into Outlook again.

So, point, erm, am I missing something with the standard web rules wizard because it really isn't much use to me at all, and I can see it being frustrating and people relying on client side rules, which kinda defeats the object?

What server version are you on? In your admin_resource_kit directory of your install medium you will see a script called sxaa and its associated readme sxaa.readme. Have a look at that and see if that doesn't fit the bill for you. Hopefully you are on 10 as that script has the latest bells and wistles.

Regards,
Don

Ok, I must be being thick, but this is driving me up the wall. I have filters that overlap, and/or need priorities and/or need to allow negative values, for example, a summary of rules that cross over under Scalix;

1) If header says Spam, move to /SPAM
2) If recipient is x@yz.com then move to /Inbox/MailX
3) If recipient is y@yz.com then move to /Inbox/MailY

I want all Spam, in SPAM, but, if it's Spam and addressed to x@yz.com it still ends up in MailX. Seems there's no priority, or no means of saying stop processing so it probably gets moved around twice.

So, thinking, I change rules 2 and 3 so as above, but also have a 'not Spam', ie a second condition attached, just to be sure. Tried that in sxaa, can't do it. Apparently I can only have a single condition, so moved back to the web based rules wizard.

Where things get stranger, a rule I created with sxaa (where it explains the condition values are wildcard based) is displayed as 'is x@yz.com' when surely if wildcard based it should be 'contains x@yz.com' ?!? Bizarrely, sxaa seems to be able to show multiple conditions, but when I put to conditions in the command line it only uses the last.

Now, more frustration, web based rules do not allow an 'is not' for many variations, ie from Spam i identify it with the X-Spam-Flag: Yes header, I want to say 'is not' to that, but can't. Am experimenting with other headers, but over all it's very, very poor and inconsistent.

sxaa looks good, and powerful, but either doesn't have full control, and the possibility to do everything the others can, or it is very badly documented. Sorry. As I see it we have the Outlook Rules, The Web Rules, and sxaa which all do the same thing, but differently, with different variations, different conditions, parameters, and results. None of which seem to be powerful enough. So can we standardise?

As it stands I am back to using the web based rules as I know I can add multiple conditions, and preying I can find some bizarre combination to my rules that keeps Spam n SPAM. (Even though I have to delete all the Ourlook rules using sxaa becasue I can't do it on the wen interface).

In summary, Close, but no Cigar. I am hoping I'm wrong, and missing the point somewhere, but at very least sxaa docs are poor (eg doesn't mention can use --not, only found that from doing --help after trying to work out how to re-create existing web created rules) Version 10 on Suse btw

I am doing the same exact thing with the SWA Rules Wizard in trying to split out my Definitely Spam and "Possibly Spam". There is a fairly easy way around this by tweaking my SpamAssassin Threshhold to, say 7, and then mark from 3 and up with the Spma Flag of "No", but in keeping everything the same for the end user, I would prefer to do this in rules that "cascade" or have an order of importance. It appears that the Scalix Rules Wizard on the server side (SWA) need a "Stop Processing More Rules" addition similar to how Outlook handles this.

If there has been a solution to this (maybe in Scalix 11), I would like to know how to go about fixing this.

-Scott