BarricadeMX experiences

[Ugo Bellavance]

Richard Lynch wrote:
> 
> I gave before and after statistics.  It was the same hardware and with 
> our volume the input is pretty much the same each day.  The results 
> speak for themselves.  What were overloaded servers with huge delays now 
> run fine.  The fact that MailScanner gets fewer messages isn't really 
> the point other than it improves performance.   Steve is correct, it's 
> not for everybody.  If your message load is small you probably don't 
> need it.   

You can tell BarricadeMX to use spamd and clamd.  I just migrated a 
small site that was a MailScanner setup with SpamAssassin + Clamd to a 
setup with BarricadeMX + spamd + clamd.  It seems to be running 
perfectly. All spam detected by BarricadeMX (smtpf) is rejected at the 
SMTP transaction.  Same for viruses.  For spamd, I set the score to 
reject at 10, so everything that gets a score of 10 or more is rejected 
at the MTA.  No more quarantine to manage, false positives always get a 
notification...   I cannot talk about load because it was minimal before.

Ugo