Le Lun 27 Juin 2005 10:14, Stig Sandbeck Mathisen a écrit : > Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> writes: > > I fully disagree, greylisting is really painful > > Since this is contrary to my experience with greylisting, I'd like to > hear more about your experiences with it, and why you consider > greylisting "really painful". I already did : for personnal use (and I use my @debian.org address for some debian related personnal discussions, like discussions with an uploader I sponsor or alike) I find that 30minutes delays are not acceptable (and I know that greylisting last only 5 minutes, but it's a fact that requeue of a mail is done 30 minutes after the first try for most of the SMTP server on the planet). I don't ask a <5s delay for every mail I send/receive, but if a mail takes more than 2-3 minutes to be delivered, then this is useless. > I'm also interested in hearing about the size of the mail platforms > you've used it on, and wether the mail platforms are list-heavy or > user-heavy, and mostly incoming or outgoing traffic. On a mail platform where you use greylisting, you generally have a boost in performances. *BUT* you punish all the MX that deliver mail to you. greylisting put the charge on the SMTP server before you, and those MX will deliver mails slower to you. like I said many times in that thread, greylist is a good solution to filter spam with quite no false positive, that's true. *BUT* it's a bad idea to use it for *every* mail. A mail that (e.g.) : - is SPF-clean - comes from hotst that are RBL-clean - <put your own fast test here> should not suffer from greylisting. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpTSHcwbXfhJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature