On 2014-05-01 03:59, Martin Braun wrote: > IMHO spam should be dealt with only on the client, not on the server. > It is not the task of the server to determine what is spam and what is > not. I know everyone does it, I used to do it too, but it is wrong. >
What if I have multiple clients? Eg: desktop, laptop, work laptop, mobile phone. I'd need to run daemonsn on all of those machines, and need to find mechanisms to keep the spam rules sycned. I also don't know of any anti-spam filters for my mobile phone. In theory, what you suggest is a great idea. But it's not as simple as it sounds. > 2014-04-26 16:26 GMT+02:00 Stéphane Guedon <[email protected]>: > > Le samedi 26 avril 2014 07:20:19, vous avez écrit : > >> Hi John, > >> > >> At 06:04 26-04-2014, John Cox wrote: > >> >Unfortunately the whole point of SPF (unlike Sender-ID which works > >> >much better and on much the same principles) is that you can reject > >> >the message before receiving it so you wouldn't have the DKIM stuff > >> >(which I think requires you to have the entire message?). > >> > >> SPF allows processing using envelope information. DKIM processing > >> can only occur after the entire message has been received. > >> > >> Regards, > >> -sm > > > > I am myself in need for a good antispam solution with opensmtpd. > > > > if dkim (which I don't use yet) and spf are not really working, what's > > the good way (I am already using spamd, not enough !) > > -- > You received this mail because you are subscribed to [email protected] > To unsubscribe, send a mail to: [email protected] > -- Hugo Osvaldo Barrera A: No, it doesn't make sense. Q: Should I include quotations *after* my reply?
pgpoQ4TFin_o4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
