On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:29:46 +1030 Greg 'groggy' Lehey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Indeed. I do, and it blocks an amazing amount of spam. That's the wrong way to deal with spam, Greg. Greylisting and SPF checks are a much better solution. > I do have the courtesy to say "please use your ISP's mail server" in > the error reply. Well, as pointed out before, that's not always possible. My ISP doesn't allow any mail with a from != terra.es to pass through their mail servers. Not only that, but they will silently drop e-mail without telling you. Their POP3 server is also broken half of the time, that's why I gave up on using their mail (and dns as well) service years ago. Modulo that, the service is good enough and I've had less than a few hours of outage in 5 years, so I don't have any plans of moving to another ISP. When people reject my mail (which comes from a static IP, gpg-signed and from a host that publishes SPF records) I simply add them to my / etc/postfix/access file, so I don't waste time reading and replying to mail that won't reach its destinantion. It's that simple :) I've tried several setups to stop spam. I get about 150/day or so. I discovered that 99% of them were coming from Windows boxes. So, if you have PF you can do tricks like this: rdr on $ext_if proto tcp from any os "Windows" to any port smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port 8025 And have all those mails end up in spamd's tarpit. However, this might send legit mail there, so I stopped using that too. I just let spamassassin do its job. Cheers, -- Miguel Mendez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.energyhq.es.eu.org PGP Key: 0xDC8514F1
pgpUo464pKAli.pgp
Description: PGP signature