OT: performance smf-sav vs milter-ahead

[Res]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

Bryan,

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Bryan Guest wrote:

> compared performance between SMF-SAV and Milter-Ahead?

Performance impact of smf-sav is not noticable, not used milter ahead as 
its commercial, was intending to try it, but since smf-sav does the job so 
well, never bothered.

However, I have not used the check sender option, only recipient, I do 
intend to trial the sender checks one day when I get time to sit there and 
watch it for a few hours.

> conjuction with MailScanner?

Makes no difference, MS has nothing to do with it, thats all about MTA 
capability.

--
Cheers
Res
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGp/YasWhAmSIQh7MRAkS/AKC0PtPvz7ofWjtNqbceNWlxwYc8ZACeNaxO
zCgwvmZZz9j6CztBYyBghjA=
=+ZWk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----