> > When I started looking was at 2.53.  It was after they made some
> > improvements to that when I tried it out, and it seemed to work great
on
> > the test machine.
> >
> > But when I went live, it really slaughtered things.
>
> How so?  SA by itself does nothing to a message except add headers,
> including a subject tag, if desired.  It cannot dispose of messages
without
> the help of some other application like amavisd-new, which can act on
those
> headers and apply user defined process rules.

It was SA with amavisd-new because without the ability to kill it is
worthless to my situation.

My goal is simple.  KILL as much spam as possible BEFORE going to IMail.

If I add weighting X-Headers, it does not do this, and does not reduce the
spam in any way, shape or form.

Then I end up having to train all our customers in how to use the web
mail, and the filtering in IMail, so on and so forth, which defeats one of
the major reasons why I kill spam at the gateway, to reduce load on the
mail servers.

> > As far as I can tell, SA was largely intended for use on POSIX boxes
where
> > an interface could be made to let the user tweak things.  That helps
cut
> > down on the rules and changes that the administrator needs to do.
>
> Aren't all Linux OSs POSIX compliant?  I'm not sure I understand what
you
> are saying here.

IMail is not on a POSIX system, and that is the default destination when
dealing with an "IMGate."  Yes, Len's work can be applied to any standard
SMTP server solution, but I was doing mental shorthand on my end in
regards to what list I was posting in.  That is why the comment is
incomplete.

--Eric


Reply via email to