Mr Nutter,
May I ask why I've been quoted into this thread?
As I've asked you before, please don't hijack threads when creating a new topic, but if you must, please at the VERY least remove the text of the unrelated message.
I'm in general not too particular about details of trimming your quoting, but clearly quoting an entire off-topic message is a waste and contributes to confusion for people performing searches, filters, etc.
There's a lot of mail in my mailbox, and I have my mailclient set up to track replies to my posts to make it easier to follow up with people I'm helping. My mailclient spotted the portion of this email which quotes me, and filtered it as something I need to follow up on.
At 08:48 AM 8/25/2004, Ronald I. Nutter wrote:
I just finished getting SA up and running using the Scott L Henderson document. It passes the tests in the documents. I don't see Spam assassin running as a process like postfix and amavisd. Is there a way to check that it is running ?
Also, what is suggested for hardware to run it on ? I will be dealing with 1500 faculty/staff/students. I have it on a 400 mhz pentium with 32 megs of ram. I know I will need to add more memory before going to production but wasn't sure about the processor.
Ron
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Nutter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Manager Information Technology Services (502)863-7002 Georgetown College Georgetown, KY 40324-1696 --------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message----- From: John Andersen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 3:39 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OT] Spam FIREWALL software
On Tuesday 24 August 2004 12:05 pm, Raquel Rice wrote: > On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:00:14 -0400 > > Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Admittedly SA is tweakable to reduce FP's considerably, but being a > > SA user the 1/25,000 FP rate doesn't choke me up at all. If it's > > true, it's quite impressive. Very few spamfilters can claim a FP > > rate anywhere near that low. > > The concern I have is what happens to false positives? They don't get
> past the firewall, so what if that's something important?
Ask yourself this: What happens to the "important" message just deleted by the user in frustration of dealing with 300 spams per day? Or the "important" message lost by a still too flaky smtp network.
My take on this is: Who would send anything "important" by email without a follow-up or confirmation of some kind?
If it was important then one should send a follow up or request a return receipt.
-- _____________________________________ John Andersen
