On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 12:47:49AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le lundi 17 juillet 2006 à 22:29 +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit : >> On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 08:36:31AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: >>> Quoting Wolfgang Lonien ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>>>> Do we use greylisting on the @debian.org domain and especially on >>>> @lists.debian.org? >>> So, up to now, we've found Thomas Bushnell who seems really hardly >>> voting against greylisting on Debian hosts, (...). >>> So far and unless I forget someone, I haven't seen much other >>> people being strongly opposed to greylisting on Debian hosts, >> Here is one: I am strongly opposed to greylisting (on mail sent to >> me or that I send), for the reason that it delays legitimate mail. > I have refused greylisting for a long time for that exact reason. > However the setup Pierre Habouzit describes does not delay most of > legitimate mail. That is the crux of the disagreement. You guys think that as long as "most" of the legitimate mail is not delayed, the price is worth it. I don't think so. > Frankly, the remaining delays are sporadic and one can live with > them. Knowing that most legitimate mail doesn't get delayed doesn't make me feel better when mail I sit waiting for gets delayed. Obviously, for most mail I don't care as I don't sit waiting for it, I batch-treat it a fez times per day or per week. So a half-hour delay on it, I don't even see it. For *most* mail. > I'm applying greylisting if one of these conditions is met: > * the incoming IP is listed in a DUL; Bingo! You hit a hot button of mine. > * Exim sender/callout fails with a fatal error. "Fatal" means not temporary? -- Lionel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
