On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 12:34:04PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2012-06-04, David Diggles <da...@elven.com.au> wrote: > > I was just thinking surely resending from a different IP breaks the RFC for > > SMTP? > > > > Then I did some googling, and found this. > > http://bsdly.blogspot.com.au/2008/10/ietf-failed-to-account-for-greylisting.html > > > > Thanks, Peter. > > > > So now it is 4 years later, has anything happened? > > > > > > No. It is perfectly valid, and even somewhat normal, to resend from > different addresses. Whether this is by pools of senders with shared > queues, or whether it's by pools of internal MXes behind NAT boxes, > it definitely happens. > > The majority of such senders try and keep within the same /24. > The greylisting.org/puremagic.com whitelist was specifically only > for senders which did not follow this (they refused to add sender > pools to the list if they stuck within /24). Though that's largely > irrelevant as their list hasn't been updated in 6 years.. >
So I guess this Wikipedia entry is incorrect, Re: breaks SMTP protocol rules? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greylisting "Greylisting will cause longer delivery delays if the sender has a large infrastructure and is sending from a different IP when it retries. However this technically breaks SMTP protocol rules, since delivery is the responsibility of the sending server and its associated IP address, and "tossing it back into a pool" for retry by a different server in the group breaks this continuity, and will quite correctly and legitimately restart the greylisting process over again, since delivery is being retried from a different server." A past battle lost by greylisters, and the world has since moved on, or something?
