On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 14:12 -0400, Jeff Rife wrote: > The milter-sender description reminded me... ... > Does anybody have any experiences with this sort of callback check?
We use it, including a database cache to lighten the load. 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. Richard _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
