Re: Bug#457318: qmail and related packages in NEW
Gerrit Pape <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> So it might well be that those SMTP servers, that accept mail regardless
> of the existence of the recipient mailbox, take load off your server's
> spam processing, because they eat spammer's resources.
I rather use a MTA that implements SMTP time delays to force the
spammer to slow down, thank you very much. I even endorse greylisting
(with a whitelist) nowadays, but you'll never see me endorsing QMail
until it is patched.
> Concerning the delayed delivery notifications, there's an efficient way
> to immediately reject those in the SMTP connection, see
I rather not force other mail admins to implement measurements to deal
with another MTA's stupidity.
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer *