I'm waiting for Greylisting too.  Vernon's DCC stuff is being debugged for
Greylisting which should soon be a reliable engine for this.  I use Postfix
as my MTA, so I'm waiting for an integration that happens at MTA handshake.
So far, I haven't seen anything.  Some said that there is a Postfix upgrade
that will allow better integration there, but I'm not following the Postfix
list that close.  Too much volume.

<<Dan>>


 

| -----Original Message-----
| From: Bob Apthorpe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
| Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 11:27 AM
| To: SATalk list
| Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SA Performance .......
| 
| Hi,
| 
| On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Jeff Koch wrote:
| 
| > We run SA 2.55, qmail-mail scanner (with F-Secure) and 
| vpopmail on a 
| > 2.4Ghz
| > P4 Dell Server with 1GB RAM and 120GB 10K ATA drive. Last week the 
| > server virus/spam filtered and popped 423,325 messages. During the 
| > last 2.5 days the server's handled 376,168 messages. The machine is 
| > smoken - looks like spam really picked up this week - the 
| load average 
| > is running between 15.0 and 20.0 and CPU is almost 100% utilized. 
| > We'll be off-loading virus scanning to another server which should 
| > allow us to double or triple the throughput with SA. We've disabled 
| > some of the RBL's, DC and Pyzor - don't use Bayes either. But 
| > everyone's happy - we capture 97% of the spam. Law of diminishing 
| > returns - reducing the remaining spam by 50% would require 
| double the equipment and personnel resources.
| 
| A couple questions: Do you reject connections at the MTA 
| level with DNSBLs? What fraction of the mail you accept is 
| spam? If you're still seeing a substantial amount of spam 
| leaking past the DNSBLs, you might consider greylisting (aka 
| "tempfailing"; see
| http://projects.puremagic.com/greylisting/) with something 
| like http://www.openfusion.com.au/labs/dist/denysoft_greylist 
| (a plugin for Qpsmtpd, a perl based replacement for qmail-smtpd.)
| 
| I'm not very familiar with qmail; does it still 
| accept-then-bounce rather than 
| reject-during-SMTP-conversation? If you could convince it to 
| do the latter (esp. rejecting before the DATA phase) you 
| could save yourself some bandwidth and processing power and 
| extend the life of your current mail system.
| 
| hth,
| 
| -- Bob
| 
| 
| -------------------------------------------------------
| This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software.
| Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System 
| offering advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes 
| on 50+ platforms.
| Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html
| _______________________________________________
| Spamassassin-talk mailing list
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
| 


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software.
Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering
advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms.
Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Reply via email to