Greylisting .. nice ..

[Scott Silva]

Res spake the following on 11/4/2006 4:34 AM:
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2006, Dhawal Doshy wrote:
> 
>> Res wrote:
>>> On Sat, 4 Nov 2006, Jim Holland wrote:
>>>
>>>> My objection to it is not that it doesn't work, but that it makes all
>>>> genuine mail servers work twice as hard to deliver mail.  I like
>>>> having an
>>>> outgoing mail queue as clean as possible, and the greylisters mean
>>>
>>> This is the biggest point of it, the people trying to get everyone
>>> using greylisting obviously dont see much mail or don't have
>>> impatient whinging @!#$@#$'s as customers
>>>
>>> It seems to be a big thing with the postmix (intended pun) users
>>> for some reason.
>>
>> Us postmix users use selective greylisting ;-) See
>> http://www.stahl.bau.tu-bs.de/~hildeb/postfix/postfix_greylisting.shtml
>>
>> I kinda agree that simply greylisting is not as effective as before.
>> However a combination of policyd-weight (rbl+rhsbl scoring) +
>> selective greylisting still works wonders in my setup..
> 
> I use RBL's in MTA rather than score them, if its trash the less
> resource sof mine  I allow them to use the better :)
> 
I like scoring the more aggressive ones first. Then if I see no false
positives over a period of time, I can move them to the MTA. I am preparing
moving the njabl_dul to the MTA because I have had a 100% spam rate with its hits.

-- 

MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!