On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:51:57 +1000, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Saturday 18 June 2005 01:07, Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I perfectly understand what SMTP is, and I perfectly *don't*
>> understand why having a 30 minutes delay or even a 2 or 3 hours
>> delay in some conditions is tolerable.
Well, admittedly, I greylist just my mail, so this is
different. But I don't read/answer mail immediately anyway (unless
you are paying my paycheck, and those don't get greylisted either),
so people have to get used to email to me not being answered until I
get around to reading it -- which may be days, at times.
> Why is it tolerable to receive 200 spams in a day? On a bad day I
> will receive over 100 spams even though I use most of the anti-spam
> measures that some people in this discussion don't like.
It is not. I get about 7-10 a week, out of a daily email
volume of 800-1000 emails. And I used to check every mail registered
as Spam until 6 months ago, and now do random spot checks when I have
time -- and the last false positive I had was last October.
I don't use RBL based blocking. I do use CRM114 in conjunction
with spamassassin witrh bayes, and I use greylisting on messages
likely to be Spam.
CRM114 did need a while to get trained right, though. But one
does not need to accept swaths of collateral damage in order to
reduce Spam volumes, in my experience.
manoj
--
I waited and waited, and when nobody called, I knew it was from you.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
