Am 15.03.2015 um 19:15 schrieb Axb:
On 03/15/2015 07:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:Am 15.03.2015 um 19:03 schrieb Axb:On 03/15/2015 06:49 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:Am 15.03.2015 um 18:32 schrieb Robert Schetterer:tagging is allowed, rejecting is nice but not a must haveif you like reject try working in milter chaining with milter-manager http://milter-manager.sourceforge.net/ ( stats included ) this gives you option for complex filter scenarios with div milters for size perhaps test combine with milter milter-size http://www.safe-mbox.com/~rgooch/email/index.html and many other milter stuff i.e https://www.milter.org/milter/98 MSH Attach Filter not easy to do but should be extrem powerfull and flexible so on topic you dont need to choose a "prefered milter", just chain and combine all milters you likewhich makes much more sense thatn bending SA to do stuff it's not designed to. IMO, deciding what chunk of a msg should be scanned should be managed by the glue and not by SA.true but if the glue (spamass-milter) would truncate the message it passes to spamc it would get back that truncated message with the added headers (which are used to decide reject or pass) and so finally *deliver* the truncated versionthen spamass-milter is the wrong choice
how else should it work?it hardly can invent the report-headers SA adds by itself which needs to land in the final message, spamc/spamd are doing the message work and the milter is just the glue to bring the MTA and SA together
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
