[Mimedefang] milter smorgas board

[Jeff Rife]

On 1 May 2006 at 17:51, Richard Laager wrote:

> Since we do reject on it, I can't say how efficient it is compared to
> other tests. From a quick log search, I see this test rejects about
> 38,000 messages per week, after things like RBLs and HELO checks (which
> block about 15,74,000 messages per week.)
> 
> In general, my philosophy is that anything which can prevent a
> SpamAssassin run is good. Running SA on a message is very CPU intensive
> and involves lots of network queries as well.

Agreed.  I'd have to go back and check how many of these required SA to 
cause a reject.  ISTR that greylisting and HELO checks got all but a 
few.


--
Jeff Rife | "There was a guy that was killed just like this 
          |  over in Jersey." 
          | "Yeah, but I figure, 'What the hell, 
          |  that's Jersey.'" 
          |         -- "Highlander"