Milter-greylist

At 02:51 PM 11.23.2004 +0000, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>
>On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 08:43:08AM -0600, Jack L. Stone wrote:
>> I agree that it would not be good to "bloat" the code on milter-greylist,
>> but I sure would like to use the "callback" feature. I cannot do that by
>> using milter-sender because it requires a later version of DB than the one
>> already compiled in sendmail-8.12.11 -- which is already compiled in my
>> base system of FBSD-4.10.
>
>You can't install two versions of DB at the same time?
>
>But if you need the callback function and could not use milter-sender, 
>then what about writing another milter?
>
>> It would be nice to be able to make use of existing DBs like the
>> "/etc/mailaccess" and aliases,etc.
>
>Here I agree. It would be nice to get milter-greylist capable of getting
>its whitelist from other sources than than the config file. 
>
>Such a change should probably await for Remy Card's work on ACL, though. 
>Remy, what's your opinion here?
>
>-- 
>Emmanuel Dreyfus
>manu@...
>

Let me reflect on this issue of ACL a bit more:

I'm presently using in the following order:
- Sendmail-8.12.11 with its own unique acl (DBs=access/aliases/virusertable)
- milter-regex with its own acl from a very large config
- milter-greylist with its own acl via config
- spamass-milter/spamassassin with MANY acls via many configs
- procmail with its various filters/recipes/rcs -- another form of acl

The above "layered" method, I catch 90+% with the first 3 layers and
another 9.999% with the rest.
They are VERY effective, but the downside is that they all require
different formats/syntax for their respective acl files.

I'm not complaining, just looking for some standardization and perhaps have
the "horses" all drink from the same "trough" to get their inique info.


Happy trails,
Jack L. Stone

System Admin
Sage-american