[Gllug] spamassassin v bogofilter

[Michael Moritz]

On Thursday 02 June 2005 18:25, Jason Clifford wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Michael Moritz wrote:
> > Thought this was about the reduction of mail server load, not weird MTA
> > implementations...
>
> If you don't care more about deliverying legitimate email than preserving
> your resources you should not be operating an ISP.
>
Sure there is a case of losing emails. But see below for that point. An MTA 
that doesnt care about negative replies is likely to lose emails even without 
any greylisting going on. Mail servers go down for maintenance reasons, are 
overloaded, reject messages because of bad content or because the sending MTA 
is erroneously blacklisted. Any MTA that cant deal with this is basically 
faulty.

> > BTW, there is still a problem with this. What does one of these "critical
> > upstream MTAs" do when it is confronted with a genuine 4xx message? Does
> > it just lose the message, seriously? I think that's even more worrying
> > than greylisting...
>
> Yes it is however the introduction of greylisting compounds such problems.

Point taken. Nevertheless the problem remains. If an ISP does lose mail on 4xx 
then it's no a propper ISP since he's not sticking to the SMTP RFC. Hence, 
such an ISP should be punished by any means don't you think? Now, the average 
user does not care about RFCs. But, in a situation where more ISPs start 
using greylisting such ISPs will be quickly forced to comply with standards. 
This is actually the case, just do some statistics about 4xx replies on your 
mail server logs and you'll see what I mean. 

mimo
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug