Zitat von Stan Hoeppner <s...@hardwarefreak.com>:
Noel Jones put forth on 12/6/2010 11:10 AM:If you decide that greylisting is right for you, postgrey is a popular choice -- it's flexible and reliable....See google for benefits and risks of using greylisting if you're not familiar with it.Interestingly, just a few days ago I decommissioned Postgrey on my MX along with some other A/S countermeasures. I did this after analyzing logs for some time. I ran Postgrey for about a year. It was stopping some spam at the beginning, although very little, but none for the last few months, and was simply slowing down some legit mail. This is not a reflection on Postgrey performance or reliability, but simply that my other A/S countermeasures are killing everything that can be killed before Postgrey gets a crack at it.
How different the world is:Postgrey (Greylisting) saved as from using RBLs with aggressive policies, in fact we have ditched all RBLs beside some few very carefully choosen and let Postgrey do its job. Content Filter are not a option at all as silently loosing mail is much worse than spam. For slowing down mail: You should have really used the auto-whitelist. With this we get around 1% mail which is actually delayed after some time.
Regards Andreas
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
