Hi, >> Is there any reason to not use the bl.score.sendrescore.com with >> postscreen? I don't understand the distinction > > why? > > postscreen is supposed to be configured with sensible scoring to reject most > spam without false positives long before it reachs smtpd or even expesnive > contentfilters > > hence the scoring and any sensible setup would use postscreen combined with > several whitelists > > that way your contentfilter has only to deal with the remaining 10% of junk > and when you optimize postscreen to use a honeypot-MX (backup mx on a second > IP with a postscreen whitelist_veto) and enforce pre-greet tests with a > larger wait time there is not much for SpamAssasin to deal with
No, no, no. That's not at all what I mean. I know what the purpose and benefit of postscreen is. My issue relates to why is score.senderscore.com used with postscreen, and not bl.score.senderscore.com as it is with SA? Perhaps it should be as well? The postscreen weights for score.senderscore.com are such that they are relative to the threshold, so a reputation of say, 70 would receive a higher score than a reputation of say, 90. In fact, 90 removes points. And why is only bl.score.senderscore.com used with SA, and not the reputation system? Thanks, Alex
