On 3/12/2014 7:32 AM, Jim Shupert wrote: > > On 3/11/2014 3:09 PM, Eric Shubert wrote: >> On 03/11/2014 11:53 AM, Scot Needy wrote: >>> Yea, >>> >>> I guess that was my original question when I asked about NAT. >>> >>> Forgive me if I ask a dumb question but.. >>> >>> I thought that the source TCP address wasn’t an issue because much >>> of the spam prevention will look at mail headers not just the TCP >>> source IP of the last relay before mail got to qmail. >>> >> >> Depends on what you consider to be "much of the spam prevention". >> There's not really much in the headers that spamdyke or spamassassin >> relies on. Source IP address is probably the biggest single factor >> that spamdyke uses. >> >> You really need to get QMT on the perimeter (or behind a simple NAT) >> in order to have decent anti-spam effectiveness. >> > I do not wish to hiJack a thread ... but would like to say that a > comprehensive "best practice" suggestion list would be wonderful. > I am presently trying to 'knuckel down' on the spam problem. > > thanks >
I use DSPAM and I don't have spam anymore. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
