Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:54:46 +0700 (ICT) From: Olivier Nicole <on@cs.ait.ac.th> To: jalmberg@identry.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: No spam??? Message-ID: <200801160254.m0G2skn2022882@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> In-Reply-To: <360AB6AE-B3C1-4CA6-AFC1-378B48B3C6DF@identry.com> (message from John Almberg on Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:48:32 -0500) References: <87A9631B-EAC5-41B8-B4C2-001C3ADBA486@identry.com> <200801150237.m0F2bqEg000116@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> <360AB6AE-B3C1-4CA6-AFC1-378B48B3C6DF@identry.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, > 2008-01-14 09:30:37.074087500 rblsmtpd: 123.20.89.67 pid 72121: 451 > http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=123.20.89.67 Just one comment, in my installation of SpamAssassin, it reports in syslog as spamd, not at rblsmtpd. This looks like logs from the rblsmtpd program that is not SpamAssasin. As some one mentionned, one way to prevent false positive and too agressive black lists is to use them through SpamAssassin only, where the black list score is only part of the spaminess. The draw back is that it puts more load the server and SpamAssassin that has to scrutinize every email, while dropping at the SMTP level is fast and uses very low resources. Bests, Olivier
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200801160254.m0G2skn2022882>