On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 04:17:38PM -0700, Tony Cratz wrote: > > So the bottom line is, using Postgrey now is just a waste of > computer resources and time.
Not at all true. Have you actually run a greylisting system? Tracked the spam volume before and after? I'm responsible for mail services for a small web-dev and hosting company. Our numbers show a typical mailbox getting roughly 5 percent as much crap through. Since this crap is then run through spamassassin, the greylisting is a huge net *reduction* in CPU (for our side; the sender, of course has some extra overhead). Because of the (first time) several minute delay due for new senders, we allow folks to disable greylisting for whole domains or individual mailboxes. Although several clients experimented with disabling it, we currently have have 4 (out of 273) boxes and zero domains that have opted out. That said, it does take some vigilance to run a greylisting system well. One needs to keep an eye on the logs to catch any systems that need exceptions. (Places with big SMTP server farms like IBM or Google, or systems that for whatever reason take a TEMPFAIL as a FAIL.) I've run a couple of different greylisting patches for qmail as well as postgrey. Postgrey/postfix is by far my favorite. -t _______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list vox-tech@lists.lugod.org http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech