Getting MailScanner to rbl

[Julian Field]

A thorough description. Someone feel like adding it to the FAQ-o-matic please?

At 21:10 29/06/2003, you wrote:
>Here's my understanding of RBL implementation.  They can be implemented
>in 3 places, each with advantages and disadvantages.
>
>Sendmail/MTA
>
>   Implementing them here is the most efficient and the most ruthless.
>The messages from blacklisted sites don't get accepted at all.
>MailScanner whitelist processing is not possible.
>
>
>MailScanner
>
>   Implementing them here costs more since the message has to be accepted
>and analyzed.  Whitelisting is honored.  There's also the advantage that
>MailScanner will detect slow responses/timeouts and temporarily disable
>the RBL sites that are not performing properly.
>
>
>SpamAssassin
>
>   Implementing them here is the most expensive in systems resources but
>is far less ruthless.  Being listed in an RBL simply contributes to your
>final spamassassin score.  It does not necessarily prevent the mail from
>being delivered.  I don't believe auto-disabling of badly performing RBL
>sites is done though.  As a result, a poorly performing RBL can really
>slow things down.  This is also true if implemented in sendmail.
>
>
>I trust that any misunderstandings I have will be soundly corrected.  ;)
>
>--
>Richard Lynch <rich at mail.wvnet.edu>

--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support