On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 15:46:31 -0300, Leandro Santi <lesa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't have statistics to back up my reasoning, but I guess it > might be interesting to implement a fourth action, i.e., forward > suspicious SMTP connections to an alternative Postfix smtpd > (perhaps proxy) service. > > The rationale is that we could use postscreen tests for > doing compulsory greylisting on general purpose mail systems > (lots of users, more than one single spam filtering policy): postscreen appears to me to be fairly similar to policyd-weight[0], which is a policy daemon for postfix. It performs many similar tests that seem to be being integrated into postscreen. I wonder if a review of the different tests performed there would be useful for additional consideration of inclusion into postscreen? m 0. http://www.policyd-weight.org/
pgprN3bZsg212.pgp
Description: PGP signature
