Hi, I'm currently busy with a substiution of my current mail server. I'm currently using * Clam-SMTP and * SpamAssassin to fight Spam. I wonder if it is worth implementing AmaViS with SpamAssassin backend instead and also using AmaViS to speak to clamd directly. But I more and more wonder wether AmaViS is even worth it?! It currently looks to me as if AmaViS is eating LOTS of ressources and it is very uncomfortable for automated installations if you have to do dynamic batch changes on the AmaViS configs - sed(1) is your friend but this hectic escaping and workarrounds is really not sustainable to maintain. So my question is: Does AmaViS have any advantages compared to the current setup? I don't seem to find lots of qualified discussions for this on the net. The AmaViS related articles I found are freaking old. Would be nice the get your best practice as a change. Thanks a lot Best regards Leander
Am 09.02.2015 um 22:29 schrieb Leander Sch?fer:> I'm currently busy with a substiution of my current mail server. I'm > currently using > > * Clam-SMTP and > * SpamAssassin > > to fight Spam. I wonder if it is worth implementing AmaViS with > SpamAssassin backend instead and also using AmaViS to speak to clamd > directly. But I more and more wonder wether AmaViS is even worth it?! It > currently looks to me as if AmaViS is eating LOTS of ressources and it > is very uncomfortable for automated installations if you have to do > dynamic batch changes on the AmaViS configs - sed(1) is your friend but > this hectic escaping and workarrounds is really not sustainable to > maintain. > > So my question is: Does AmaViS have any advantages compared to the > current setup? I don't seem to find lots of qualified discussions for > this on the net. The AmaViS related articles I found are freaking old. > Would be nice the get your best practice as a changei don't see advantages but issues if you ask something on the SA list and finally find out that amavis handles configurations different ressource usage is mostly the same, amavis is only the glue the hard work is done anyways by spamassassin and clamav for both milters exists so you can reject spam instead only flag and deliver or even more worse silently discard it - not a real problem with postscreen and RBL scroing in front, happy running here since 2014/08 with zero load even at peaks of 400 junk attempts per minute smtpd_milters = unix:/run/spamass-milter/spamass-milter.sock, unix:/run/clamav-milter/clamav-milter.socket -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 181 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20150209/9dbd1a40/attachment.sig>
Hi Harald puuhh - thank you for your positive feedback. I'm really relieved ;) It's been a pleasure to write batch scripts for configurin SpamAssassin - and it has also been running like a charm the past 6 years. Go to hell AmaViS ! Crap ;) Best regards Leander Am 09.02.15 um 22:33 schrieb Reindl Harald:> > Am 09.02.2015 um 22:29 schrieb Leander Sch?fer: >> I'm currently busy with a substiution of my current mail server. I'm >> currently using >> >> * Clam-SMTP and >> * SpamAssassin >> >> to fight Spam. I wonder if it is worth implementing AmaViS with >> SpamAssassin backend instead and also using AmaViS to speak to clamd >> directly. But I more and more wonder wether AmaViS is even worth it?! It >> currently looks to me as if AmaViS is eating LOTS of ressources and it >> is very uncomfortable for automated installations if you have to do >> dynamic batch changes on the AmaViS configs - sed(1) is your friend but >> this hectic escaping and workarrounds is really not sustainable to >> maintain. >> >> So my question is: Does AmaViS have any advantages compared to the >> current setup? I don't seem to find lots of qualified discussions for >> this on the net. The AmaViS related articles I found are freaking old. >> Would be nice the get your best practice as a change > > i don't see advantages but issues if you ask something on the SA list > and finally find out that amavis handles configurations different > > ressource usage is mostly the same, amavis is only the glue > the hard work is done anyways by spamassassin and clamav > > for both milters exists so you can reject spam instead only flag and > deliver or even more worse silently discard it - not a real problem > with postscreen and RBL scroing in front, happy running here since > 2014/08 with zero load even at peaks of 400 junk attempts per minute > > smtpd_milters = unix:/run/spamass-milter/spamass-milter.sock, > unix:/run/clamav-milter/clamav-milter.socket >
Am 09.02.2015 um 22:29 schrieb Leander Sch?fer:> So my question is: Does AmaViS have any advantages compared to the > current setup? I don't seem to find lots of qualified discussions for > this on the net. The AmaViS related articles I found are freaking old. > Would be nice the get your best practice as a change.Amavis is a framework, i has more stuff included you might like i.e you wanna use more antivir providers, use it for dkim and lot more, anyway if you dont wanna use it , it may better switch to clamav-milter and spamass-milter from you recent setup perhaps read http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/#features after all this isnt a true dovecot question, ask amavis postfix lists Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer -- [*] sys4 AG http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstra?e 15, 81669 M?nchen Sitz der Gesellschaft: M?nchen, Amtsgericht M?nchen: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein