From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 16 15:53:05 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0937B16A468 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:53:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jalmberg@identry.com) Received: from mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.4.197]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D323513C45B for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:53:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jalmberg@identry.com) Received: from [192.168.1.110] (ool-4b7f8e42.static.optonline.net [75.127.142.66]) by mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTP id <0JUQ00MEXUSDQNY0@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:53:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:53:01 -0500 From: John Almberg In-reply-to: <200801160254.m0G2skn2022882@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-id: <6FF7BE89-140E-4D61-9FB3-247F88A42998@identry.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <87A9631B-EAC5-41B8-B4C2-001C3ADBA486@identry.com> <200801150237.m0F2bqEg000116@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> <360AB6AE-B3C1-4CA6-AFC1-378B48B3C6DF@identry.com> <200801160254.m0G2skn2022882@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> Subject: Re: No spam??? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:53:05 -0000 >> 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. > Ah... I see. Yes, you are correct. It is rblsmtpd that is doing the filtering. One of my goals with this mail server set up (primarily pf, qmail, spamassassin, maildrop, courier) was to minimize processing, since my last set up got totally bogged down handling my, and my client's email, frequently running with a load of 8 or more with several spam per second. A real drag. This set up runs at a much lower load, and seems to do a better job filtering spam. -- John