Milter-greylist

--- In milter-greylist@yahoogroups.com, Eduardo Casarero
> wrote:
>
> > I think that involving DB's Clusters change the spirit of
> milter-greylisting (its a milter) also you need DBA skills to manage
> such a cluster.
>
> The idea _is_ to change the spirit of Milter-greylisting -- towards a
> scalable configuration. Note that you don't need to use a MySQL
> cluster. A simple MySQL server will do for most medium sized
> operations. The scalability of MySQL will create an upgrade path as
> the installation grows. Also, the old backend will still be available.
> I am curious as to why you feel the fact that it is a milter does not
> jive with scalability?

IMHO a milter is a little piece in the antispam machine it runs on the MTA (sendmail, postfix, etc) doing a great work at MTA level. In my experience users (i have like 50k) screw things with whitelist/blacklist, so having a well tuned milter greylisting with p2p, dummy daemon or the method you want to sincronize tuples its ok.

Milter-greylist its not a MTA, so i try to set the point that adding features to milter-greylist that already you can do with the MTA is a waste of resources (or you can maybe put it in the MTA wishlist)

However is my point of view, and in my experience in Mail Gateway things shoud stay as simple as posible.

PD: Maybe we can check barricade MX and try to add to milter-greylist some new ideas.

>
> > I just think that the cost of implementing a big database such as
> mysql is a waste of resources and time for something so simple as
> milter-greylist.
> >
>
> If that is the consensus, I will gladly rest my case...
>
>