Joerg Jung <[email protected]> writes: > I also know about spamd, but that is not really an option for now as the > server speaks v6 and STARTTLS, moreover I have legacy users which AUTH > on port 25 as well. This does not play well with spamd.
spamd doesn't even attempt smtp auth, but then once the sender is whitelisted (as a valid sender should be), the problem would go away. Your regular and valid correspondents would not see spamd at all -- after all spamd is supposed to simply slow down the obvious spambots. In your scenario (as in most others) it's likely useful to explore the nospamd option, as in maintain a table of IP addresses or ranges that are simply never redirected to spamd. It's even in the spamd man page (first pf.conf ruleset example). - Peter -- Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic" delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds. -- You received this mail because you are subscribed to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send a mail to: [email protected]
