I'm looking for something similar. I instead of letting the users mess with the settings. I want to have a quarantine area and have each user have their own inbox that they can access over web. All spam coming to that user will go to that inbox and they and look at it and decide if they want it or not. All legit E-mail will automatically be sent to their regular inbox. Is this doable? Is this old news? right now, I just have certain rejects and spam going to one mail account that I have to check periodically.
Thanks. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Len Conrad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 10:52 AM Subject: [IMGate] Re: user control interface - web based app > Somebody who's done per-user modification to IMgate give us the big picture: > > how does the user override the admin's per-MX policies? > > how many users, having said they want/need per-user policies, actually > spend any time futzing with their personal policies? And do these probably > small number per-user adopters justify the implementing the per-user > logistics on the MX of a bunch of additional programs to install AND > maintain (perl mods and apps, apache, php mods and apps, etc, etc) > > Do you remove per-MX policies and let the user fight his own spams battles? > > does it scale to 25K users doing web access to the MX to play with their > policies, and the MX scanning a 25K user policy database for all incoming > traffic? > > btw, I personally don't believe in per-user policy mgmt, so I won't be > adding per-user stuff to IMGate basic or advanced. > > AK, I think you're on the wrong track if you think per-user is the best way > to improve spam blocking, since you are still running a quite basic IMGate. > > Apart from the probably few follow ups in this thread, discussing per-user > MX is not part of IMGate so a discussion of how/why is better done on other > lists, please. > > > Len > > >
