[milters] Archive

Lists Index Date Thread Search

Article: 956
From: Taylor, Grant
Date: 2006-06-05 16:42:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Question regarding the merits of milter flag to

Removal...........: milters-request@milter.info?subject=remove
More information..: http://www.milter.info/#Support
--------------------------------------------------------

>   Most mail filters will annoy one or more of your users for assorted 
> reasons; I had no end of people complaining that milter-sender was 
> keeping them from receiving email from their busted-mailer friends. 
> Fortunately, the Snert milters have undergone a lot of work to make them 
> very good at what they do, and also very flexible for exceptions; but 
> you're still going to have people who don't like them.

I too have run in to multiple users that do not like the filters that we have in place. 
However that being said we have had the filters in question in place for over a year now. 
We have successfully dealt with unhappy users either by white listing their accounts and /
or sending domains that we know to be ok.  The other option that we have take on some
occasions (through great pain on both of our parts) was to educate the client that they
really did need to be protected from some of the things that were coming in.  In short I
am VERY well aware of what you are speaking of and still run the filters that I do.

>   So.. the worst case scenario is to imagine the inevitable time 
> somewhere in the future when you go away (vacation, cruise, hospital 
> visit, etc) for a few unreachable hours, days, or weeks, and one of 
> those filters decides to keel over dead and needs manual attention to 
> restart. If the whole time the filter is down, your users are completely 
> unable to receive their mail, you'll make your list of unsatisfied 
> customers quite a bit longer.

*nod*  I understand and will take your warning under advisement.  Fortunately in my
situation I have backup MXs that will take and queue email for a while for me.  I will
also insist that valid sending mail servers retry to send the message.  If a sending
server is not willing to resend a message then the message that they are sending must not
be important.  I know I'm putting my head on the chopping block, but I'll do so as I have
done for the last year.  My company has also decided that it is acceptable that in the
worst case scenario that email can be down for a few hours.  We also have many people that
function as a backup admin that I could walk through over the phone how to disable such
issues if need be.

>   In my case, it was decided after a few incidents of just the above 
> type that no single filter was that important. Some sites may consider 
> virus scanning to be that important - we do, but we solve it instead by 
> having multiple independent virus filters.

After doing some more thinking, I believe that I'll enable the Temp Fail flag for the
filters that we run that will Reject messages, i.e. milter-sender for sender verification
and milter-clamc for virus scanning.

>   YMMV, but I'd suggest asking your users' opinions (depending, 
> obviously, on the nature of your admin/customer relationship to them).

I can ask a few of my users, however most of them are small clients that only have 2 - 5
people in their office that do not even know how important it is to update their virus
scanner, thus they pay us to help them.



Grant. . . .

Lists Index Date Thread Search