Le 05/01/2011 02:15, Karsten Bräckelmann a écrit : > On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 00:58 +0100, mouss wrote: >> Le 03/01/2011 13:28, Jari Fredriksson a écrit : >>> >>> I want to secure a postfix site with rbls, no spamassassin at this >>> moment. (I use SpamAssassin on other sites, and no RBLs at SMTP time, so >>> I'm not very experienced with this. SA has may RBL's, sure, but what to >>> use to kill them when seen?) > >> if you use that and if you are not "unlucky", then you don't need other >> DNSBLs: >> >> Recipient unknown................: 5318 ( 73.85 %) >> DNSBL zen.spamhaus.org...........: 816 ( 11.33 %) > > This alone tells some facts about these stats. For one, they are > gathered from all SMTP delivery attempts. Usually, on this list, stats > for BL performance are relative to mail that otherwise would have been > accepted without SA. Which in every case but the most pathetic does not > include unknown recipient rejections at all.
My understanding was that OP asked about smtp time rejections. obviously, this won't check received headers, nor junk from yahoo/gmail/... > > >> as you can see, all DNSBLs but spamhaus are more or less useless. > > While ZEN in stats indeed tends to have the best hitrate and a > negligible FP rate, that sentence is incorrect as written. sorry if I wasn't clear: I mean at smtp time. > It definitely > depends on the order -- and whether or not you are able to use ZEN > (below the free usage limit or a paying rsync client). true. > > BLs low in your order most likely will perform better, if used before > ZEN, and ZEN will perform worse if used after other BLs. > >
