Le Mar 28 Juin 2005 08:36, Bob Proulx a écrit : > Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > Le Lun 27 Juin 2005 10:14, Stig Sandbeck Mathisen a écrit : > > > Since this is contrary to my experience with greylisting, I'd > > > like to hear more about your experiences with it, and why you > > > consider greylisting "really painful". > > > > I already did : for personnal use (and I use my @debian.org address > > for some debian related personnal discussions, like discussions > > with an uploader I sponsor or alike) I find that 30minutes delays > > are not acceptable (and I know that greylisting last only 5 > > minutes, but it's a fact that requeue of a mail is done 30 minutes > > after the first try for most of the SMTP server on the planet). > > > > I don't ask a <5s delay for every mail I send/receive, but if a > > mail takes more than 2-3 minutes to be delivered, then this is > > useless. > > I think you misunderstand. Remember that only the first exchange > with a new address is delayed. After the initial exchange there is > no more delay. Your continuing conversations will not have a delay.
and yet please rememeber one of my previous mails : some of my regular corespondant have mails that use SRS and that will also have a MAIL FROM that changes every 3/4 hours. > > like I said many times in that thread, greylist is a good solution > > to filter spam with quite no false positive, that's true. *BUT* > > it's a bad idea to use it for *every* mail. A mail that (e.g.) : > > - is SPF-clean > > - comes from hotst that are RBL-clean > > - <put your own fast test here> > > should not suffer from greylisting. > > Remember that all subsequent messages after the first one are not in > any way delayed. The effect there is the same as not having > greylisting. even if that was true, I don't see why the first mail should be delayed when it's obviously a legitimate mail. and now think at the thing I just said. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O [EMAIL PROTECTED] OOO http://www.madism.org
pgpQmjqYulR2c.pgp
Description: PGP signature
