Am 29.07.2016 um 20:45 schrieb Dianne Skoll: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 20:36:51 +0200 > Robert Schetterer <r...@sys4.de> wrote: > >> Am 29.07.2016 um 20:07 schrieb Dianne Skoll: >>> I don't agree. Greylisting done properly is very effective and has >>> minimal impact. We have it on by default on our spam-filtering >>> service and very few people have even noticed it. > >> show evidence, dont speculate ,measure > > What evidence do you want? Signed affidavits from our customers that they > haven't noticed greylisting? I'm not sure what measurements or evidence > you seek.
hopefuly you have permanent log analyser as mailadmins should have in any case however you can also use grep etc on logfiles so i.e measure mails tagged as spam by spamassassin with pure greylisting setup running before tagging ,perhaps for one week, then stop greylisting ,do the same with pure postscreen setup, compare results, this way you may given direction if you still need greylisting. Happy customers are good for business but they are not a counter you should use and trust on to post recommendations about effectiveness of a tec procedure on a tec list > > Regards, > > Dianne. > Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer -- [*] sys4 AG http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Schleißheimer Straße 26/MG, 80333 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
