Brent Gardner wrote:
> I'm currently using 2 (for redundancy) QmailToaster boxes to filter in
> front of an Exchange server. They are not currently configured with taps.
>
> Management has expressed some concern because we are unable to retrieve
> messages that have been blocked.
That's the whole idea. Some PHBs just don't get it. ;)
I take it you've experienced cases of legitimate email being rejected? What
was the cause of rejection in those cases? Perhaps you're using an RBL
that's a bit too tight.
If a legitimate sender is unable to send to you you, they should be able to
contact you in other ways to let you know of the problem, which typically is
on their end. If they continue to have things misconfigured on their (the
sending) end, you can always whitelist them if necessary.
> I have some questions about taps. Taps won't see messages that are
> blocked by chkuser or spamdyke, right?
Correct.
> I am considering implementing a two-stage approach. The first box in
> line will do no filtering, it will simply copy each incoming message via
> a tap on the domain and forward to the next stage. Tapped messages will
> be deleted via a cron job after 7 days. The second stage will filter
> with chkuser, spamdyke, spamassassin, clamav, etc., more aggressively
> than what we currently implement before sending mail on to Exchange.
>
> Is this a good approach? Are there any gotchas I should be looking out
> for?
>
spamdyke would lose most (if not all) of its effectiveness that way, as the
sending server would become your front end taps server.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
---------------------------------------------------------------------
QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
