Who does RBL checks - MailScanner or SpamAssassin?

Alex Neuman alex at nkpanama.com
Sat Jun 10 00:30:09 IST 2006

Most of the servers I handle are authoritative for their domain, and  
do caching for whoever's behind them on a private network. I try to  
only do recursive lookups for localhost and 192.168.x.x addresses  
within private networks, and just answer for their own domains when  
asked by anyone outside.

On Jun 9, 2006, at 3:20 PM, Dhawal Doshy wrote:

> Alex Neuman writes:
>>> None, zilch.. we do not tune SA at all (i compile rpms from the   
>>> stock tar.gz distro).. moreover we add tonnes of SARE rules to  
>>> it.  If using a dedicated server for MySQL based Bayes is tuning,  
>>> then  yes we do tuning. From that POV, we use djbdns' dnscache  
>>> for the  local caching-nameserver, which helps Net::DNS  
>>> tremendously. Also  thanks to the prolocation chaps, we rsync  
>>> SURBL for local use..
>> Is using djbdns' dnscache better performance-wise than running  
>> Bind  in caching mode? I know this probably sounds dumb but since  
>> Bind w/ caching is installed by default on most rh-based linux  
>> distros I've  never bothered to do djbdns...
> i can't really say which one is better.. i seem to like dnscache's  
> performance and can keep it on a leash (from a resource  
> perspective, see the wiki entry). Another reason being that i come  
> from a qmail shop and have always been comfortable with dnscache  
> (never gave bind+caching_ns a chance except for authoritative  
> nameservers).
> - dhawal
> -- 
> MailScanner mailing list
> mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
> http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
> Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list