Le dim 9 juillet 2006 14:30, Marc Haber a écrit : > On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 08:14:20 +0200, Christian Perrier > > <bubulle@debian.org> wrote: > >Quoting Thomas Bushnell BSG (tb@becket.net): > >> martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> writes: > >> > This has been brought up. Basically I don't think people were > >> > opposed to it, but there was noone available to implement it. > >> > >> There were people opposed to it, in fact. > > > >What were their arguments? > > For example, that greylisting puts significant load on systems that > deliver mail to us, and that it is only a question of time before > spam zombies retry. hence a good way to achieve that, is to apply greylisting on hosts that do not seem to be a valid SMTP server. good hints are: * beeing listed in some RBL's (like 'dynamic IPs' rbls), * not having a valid reverse DNS, * using very curious EHLO/HELO, * ... all those checks are really cheap, and almost never makes the thing greylist really big and well known SMTP's, since it's useless to greylist SMTP's anyway, it only makes them unhappy (which is your point). as said a couple of times in that thread, such a policy is already in place on alioth with quite a good result IMHO. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgp4fqKjwAeiu.pgp
Description: PGP signature