On Friday 03 December 2004 09.44, Russell Coker wrote: > accept mail) on a spam-trap will be fine. The Postfix implementation of > gray-listing postgrey does not send it's 450 code until after the rcpt > to:,
Just for completeness. Greylisting, as the term was defined in the original paper, always uses (client IP/envelope sender/envelope rcpt) triples to block on, so every greylisting implementation needs to wait until RCPT TO before it can return 450. postfix and postgrey can, additionally, return '450-if-accepted' which allows postgrey to be included early in the mail processing (so it adds all data point to its database), but if a mail would be rejected anyway by a later restriction (DNSBL, whatever), *that* rejection is the one seen by clients, and not the one from the greylisting. Note: I'm not really sure what the benefit is of this - if mail is rejected anyway on a DNSBL or whatever, there's not much point in adding the data to postgrey's database. But that's how postgrey works. (And - this to Stephen Frost, I believe - there is a patch to postgrey which I will include in the next version, and I believe which will also be included in the next upstream, to whitelist a client IP as soon as one greylisted email came through. So the load on legitimate mailservers will be even smaller.) greetings -- vbi [some people on this list have been cc:ing me in the past. Please don't.] -- Don't hit the keys so hard, it hurts. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]