Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 04:48:22 +0300 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com> To: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Cc: Aaron Holmes <evil@evildomain.org>, chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Spam filters Message-ID: <20051004044822.06e66c6a@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <86mzlqiaab.fsf@xps.des.no> References: <43410329.2080902@evildomain.org> <20051003232829.56d753ea@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <86mzlqiaab.fsf@xps.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:02:36 +0200 des@des.no (Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav) wrote: > Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com> writes: > > Aaron Holmes <evil@evildomain.org> wrote: > > > Any recomendations on good spam filters? > > Dspam [is] more accurate that spam assassin,with less resources and > > less work for the admin >=20 > Dspam is designed to work as a local delivery agent; all email > addresses must map to a local user, and it delivers mail to an mbox > file (though there are patches to make it work with maildir). For > more complex setups (IMAP server, virtual mailboxes / domains), > SpamAssassin is still the only practical alternative. Actually your information is outdated. It works very nice demonized as a content filter (LMTP/SMTP). --=20 IOnut Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051004044822.06e66c6a>