On 26 September 2007, Liviu Daia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 26 September 2007, Luca Corti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 17:02 +0300, Liviu Daia wrote: > > > > Another delivery attempt would be needed after this time to pass > > > > spamd. > > > Moral: randomize the greylisting time... > > > > Between which min/max valuse? Keep in mind that this corresponds to > > the (minimum) delay introduced in delivering a good messages to the > > mailbox. > > That's up to you. The minimum should be large enough to keep away > "naive" bots, as it does now. The maximum should be as large as you > can afford without being too anti-social. :) Some crap will still pass > through anyway.
The maximum should also leave plenty of time before expiry. Some mailers use queue backoff algorithms, which means some legitimate messages might never get a chance to pass if the window is too small... Regards, Liviu Daia -- Dr. Liviu Daia http://www.imar.ro/~daia