IMO, greylisting via postgrey has had a really positive impact for reducing inbound spam. The delay characteristics are configurable and the impact to end-users can be minimized.
Also, IMO, configuring "the ultimate email server" is more about the needs of your network and/or application. You may find that the best configuration for you is multiple servers or multiple postfix instances. There are different efficiencies to be had on inbound vs outbound mail flows...don't be fixed upon a monolithic design. -- ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤ kyoboku kazeoshi ¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mikkel Bang <facebookman...@gmail.com<mailto:facebookman...@gmail.com>> wrote: I'm trying to configure "the ultimate email server" for this webapp that needs to send and receive / forward emails to and from thousands of users. But with so many people recommending so many different tools, it gets hard to come to a conclusion. Looks like I'm finally arriving at this though: postfix (postfix-anti-UCE.txt) + dspam - what do you guys think? Dropped: - postscreen: Looked into http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html but couldn't really find anything concrete to add to my setup - postgrey: Advised against by the dudes in Freenode #postfix - I've tried it before and it was really effective, but I don't think my users will like that 5 minute delay - opendkim+spf+dmarc: Advised against by the dudes in Freenode ##freebsd, saying its role in anti-spam protection is minimal - spamassassin: Too old, too huge and too hard to set up (but maybe those who advised against it had more against Perl than anything else) - spamdb+greytrapping: Not necessary if I'm already running dspam - mailscanner: Not necessary if I'm already running dspam Mikkel
