[Rspamd-Users] greylisting optimisation

[Gerben Wierda]

Yes, I understood that. Thank you.

Might a size issue play a role (message too small for a good hash)? I saw a message being sent and get a 4.7.1 twice (different client). Is it 100% ruled out that this can happen? Because then I must have been mistaken.

G

> On 21 Nov 2020, at 17:02, Vsevolod Stakhov <vsevolod at rspamd.com> wrote:
> 
> On 21/11/2020 15:56, Gerben Wierda via Users wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 21 Nov 2020, at 15:52, Vsevolod Stakhov <vsevolod at rspamd.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 21/11/2020 14:51, Gerben Wierda via Users wrote:
>>>> I am using greylistihng as it does stop a lot of spam.
>>>> 
>>>> However, several parties (like Google) do not send greylisting-frriendly from their farms. To minimise the disadvantage of that I caneither add google.com <http://google.com/> to a whitelist or change the action settings so that it is somewhat more unlikely valid mail is being grey listed.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> What do you mean by 'greylisting-friendly'? Rspamd uses full body
>>> content for greylisting tokens as well.
>> 
>> In the sense that some MTA’s are farms where a 4.7.1 temp fail will not be sent by the same client. Like Google. I am under the impression that my rspamd will not accept the same message when it is retried from another server from the farm.
>> 
>> G
>> 
> 
> Your impression is wrong and I have explained why previously.
> -- 
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.rspamd.com <mailto:Users at lists.rspamd.com>
> https://lists.rspamd.com/mailman/listinfo/users <https://lists.rspamd.com/mailman/listinfo/users>