Eric Shubert wrote: > However, assuming that rblsmtpd and spamdyke are equally efficient at > processing RBLs (which is not necessarily a good assumption), letting > spamdyke do the rbl processing would be (slightly) more efficient, as there > would be one less process and pipe to pass the data through.
Not to mention logging/stats. _______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
