I may be wrong, as I haven't implemented it yet, but postscreen may give you that same functionality at the MTA level.
...Kevin -- Kevin Miller Network/email Administrator, CBJ MIS Dept. 155 South Seward Street Juneau, Alaska 99801 Phone: (907) 586-0242, Fax: (907) 586-4588 Registered Linux User No: 307357 -----Original Message----- From: Grant Taylor [mailto:gtay...@tnetconsulting.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 12:09 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: RBL On 10/10/2018 01:56 PM, Tom Hendrikx wrote: > However, in general it's better to use DNSBLs at the MTA level, which > uses a lot less resources than implementing them in Spamassassin. So > try and set them up in postfix first. I conceptually agree. However, I prefer to do some RBL testing in SpamAssassin because I can easily check multiple RBLs and tag messages as spam, or reject, based on spam score. Conversely, most MTA's implement RBLs as a binary pass / fail situation. Thus SpamAssassin gives more flexibility and provides a configurable gray area that MTA's can't do themselves. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
