- Previous message: support: "Re: autoresponder at front"
- Maybe in reply to: Jorey Bump: "Tuning Concurrency Limits"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
|
|
|
From: mouss (no email)
Date: Wed May 02 2007 - 17:08:46 EDT
Jorey Bump wrote:
> mouss wrote:
>> Noel Jones wrote:
>>> OP is using smtpd_proxy_filter rather than content_filter, so it is
>>> related.
>>
>> I missed that.
>>
>> This is yet another argument in favour of "offline" filtering.
>
> Don't be misled. This is a *very* minor issue on my system and I'm
> just doing a little tuning. The before-queue filter works extremely
> well and our support addresses see only about 2 spam messages a week,
> in spite of the international and very public distribution of the
> addresses. Before migrating to this system, the support addresses were
> seeing over 200 spam messages a *day*. If your system can support it,
> a before-queue filter is well worth considering.
don't misunderstand me. I said this is an argument to put in the "CONS"
part of proxy_filter. I didn't say it's the whole story. there is a
tradeoff and everyone needs to find a balance that suits his setup.
>
> The issue I'm trying to deal with is a result of one of our mailing
> lists targeting a handful of servers within our organization with
> thousands of recipients, using insufficient recipient verification
> when managing the list. As a result, we get a flurry of bounces from
> just a few sources. I would guess this is not the norm in most
> environments, where the origin of bounces is more evenly disbursed.
ok. have a good luck.
|
|
|