On Sun, 12 May 2002, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 11:52:23AM +1200, Jason Haar wrote:
>> I'd suggest the opposite is better: have the real MTA relay it to
>> spamproxyd. If you do it your way, you've just lost all anti-relaying
>> protection...
>
> Yep. Running spamproxyd is really not an option for most of us.
> You lose (if I'm not mistaken)
> - SMTP AUTH
Nope, at least not with my model. Admittedly this /is/ vaporware
because I don't need it, but it would work just fine with this.
This is why I would do direct pass-through of commands rather than
acting as a real SMTP server.
> - STARTTLS/SSL
Yup.
> - The IP of the real sender
Yup.
> - The option to have your real MTA refuse the message at SMTP time.
Nope. The pass-through aspect works here as well, though it does mean
that SA runs before any MTA tests.
> Now you have to send mail bounces for viruses, dead addresses, and
> other non real mail that went through. God knows where the bounces
> end up, if anywhere.
They should work OK. OTOH, using something like the Postfix internal
SMTP-based filtering system would work with the same software without
the problems you name.
I don't believe that's a generally applicable solution, though. I
guess if people wanted that sort of thing they could just run a
decent MTA, though. :)
Daniel
--
It's a kind of war
Where I plant bombs inside
of myself
-- Anne Sexton, _The Addict_
_______________________________________________________________
Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply
the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
