Re: OT: sorbs blacklisting scam
On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 16:31, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Mike Bird said:
> > You are arguing against providing a safety net. We hold inbound
> > messages in a queue for several days (space permitting) just like
> > outbound messages. This is an added-value service which helps to
> > prevent people from losing email when some twit has filled their
> > mailbox and someone else is sending from an ISP with a retry timeout
> > less than a typical human's sleep cycle.
>
> The sender gets a DSN saying "Sorry, your mail didn't get delivered"
> either way, right? Do you really think that creating the bounce message
> yourself is better in some way than having the sending MTA create it?
Yes, because our timeout is longer than that of some ISPs.
Some ISPs are using two or four hour timeouts. I'd rather
not have to tell our clients that they need to wake up every
90 minutes and empty their mailboxes to avoid losing messages.
> > > Creating backscatter because you can't configure your organizations
> > > mail spool so that the left hand knows about the right hand is still
> > > bad form.
> >
> > This thread has already mentioned numerous cases where backscatter is
> > unavoidable. Please post your Exim config which handles such cases
> > without backscatter. If it's that good, I'll even switch our
> > combination of Postfix, QMail, and custom SMTP code over to Exim.
>
> Since exim can do arbitrary lookups in a number of backends, it would
> be trivial to store quota information in sql, ldap, flat files or cdb on
> shared storage, or whatever other signalling mechanism you can think of to
> communicate state. As for config file snippets, the first hit on google
> for 'exim quota sql' takes you to a discussion of how to implement it.
> I look forward to another qmail installation disappearing. It seems to
> be one of the primary agents of backscatter spam on the public internet.
If Exim can do it then so can a Turing machine. Claiming that
a solution exists is not the same as providing a solution.
We're look forward to seeing your Exim config that avoids
all of the potential causes of backscatter previously
identified in this thread. Then we'll see if the reduced
performance and/or functionality are worthwhile tradeoffs.
Thanks,
--Mike Bird
Reply to: