On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 02:08 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > Owen Heisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The point you've been trying to make all through this thread is I > > think starting to become clear to me (everyone cheer now), because I > > didn't realize think about mail being scanned for spam before a full > > message is received. Is it true that in the case of getmail (POP3) > > sending a (full) message to the recipient via sendmail, a spam > > checker will not do anything? (If you know of any good > > general/overall mail docs...) > > I don't think I understand what you mean. Here is how I see it: > > 1. You receive mail via SMTP. You get the chance to reject the mail > before getting it on your system so you can save some bandwidth > > 2. You receive mail via POP3/IMAP. Unless you use some programs > like mailfilter (suggested elsewhere in this thread) you already have > the spam on your system so it doesn't matter where you do the filtering > (getmail, MTA, MDA, MUA, ...). My choice would be in getmail or MDA > (maildrop). > > However, in a *mixed* environment it makes sense to implement the > filtering once (MTA for the added benefit on point 1.) and use the same > for getmail.
And I suppose I would consider mine a mixed environment, because I want to be able to receive mail via SMTP and getmail/POP3. > What I don't think is optimal is to redirect *all* your mails through an > MTA like exim/postfix/... just to do some filtering. Getmail can do > this on its own just fine (well not the actual filtering, but then > neither does exim/postfix), no need for the added complexity. Yes, that makes sense. Thanks for helping me understand this a bit better! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
