On 7/26/23 2:34 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
milters should not be spam scanners, spamassassin is better
On 26.07.23 13:32, Grant Taylor via users wrote:
{spamass-milter,milter-spamc} combined with SpamAssassin cause me to
question the veracity of that statement.
+1
Milter implies doing the filtering during the SMTP transaction. I
consider the ability to reject messages that SpamAssassin declares as
(bad enough) spam at SMTP time to be a good thing.
I use spamass-milter on my system and amavisd-milter on other systems
especially to be able to reject spam at SMTP time. Definitely a good thing.
You just should not use it for "outgoing" mail from your clients, so they
don't complain about sending mail taking ages.
You may need to limit SA processing to some 270 seconds to avoid 5-minutes
timeout (which contradicts RFC5321 section 4.5.3.2.6. which mandates
10-minute timeout on DATA termination, but here we are).
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Your mouse has moved. Windows NT will now restart for changes to take
to take effect. [OK]
