[Mimedefang] Re: compare mimedefang to mailscanner
David F. Skoll
dfs at roaringpenguin.com
Tue Jan 16 13:55:13 EST 2007
Scott Silva wrote:
> But can you run multiple virus scanners with mimedefang?
Sure.
> How will that add to the startup costs of more than one virus scanner?
If they are command-line virus-scanners, performance will be terrible.
If you have as a requirement the need to run multiple command-line
virus-scanners on large quantities of e-mail, then MIMEDefang is the
wrong choice. (Well, actually, a non-daemonizable virus-scanner is the
wrong choice, but I won't get too deeply into mudslinging. :-))
> I am currently running mimedefang for check_against_smtp_server and
> mailscanner with spamassassin for virus scanning and spam. If I add a
> supported virus scanner in mailscanner, I just have to add its name to the
> config file and reload. How much code do I have to write in mimedefang to do
> the same?
If the virus scanner is already supported, not much. There are probably
examples on the wiki.
[...]
> Sure, mimedefang is like a swiss army knife. In the right hands, it
> can do almost everything. ...but I am no McGyver, so I can't save
> the world with just a swiss army knife! I need more tools in my tool
> chest!
MIMEDefang is not for everyone. I'm not trying to say that MIMEDefang
is better or worse than Mailscanner. I was just trying to objectively
(as much as possible!) compare their behaviours under different
load conditions.
--
David.
More information about the MIMEDefang
mailing list