> Most users will never enable such a function because of not understanding it.
That's what i way saying. They thus won't benefit from it as well.
> > I currently use rblsmtpd, a separate package which is inserted between
> > tcpserver and qmail-smtpd and which rejects smtp connection from rbl sites.
>
> And breaks SSL.
sslwrap works; i havn't testet TLS yet.
I'm not sure if this really breaks TLS, but i havn't read these RFCs
rblsmtpd is a leftover from my old qmail installation.
> And is totally unneeded for qmail-ldap as this feature is builtin.
The builtin has some drawbacks, too.
It has no RBL-Specific error message as rbmlsmtpd does, and does not give
the user an url explaining why his mail was rejected.
The error message should at least include http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/ as
reference.
> > Currently i get about 5 double bounces a week, but i have just about 600
> > customers; these double bounces are usually some mails with a bad
> > Return-Path sent to no longer existing addresses.
>
> So. we have more customers and i get less double bounces. This discussion
> brings has no target.
Which is mostly due to qmail-ldap rejecting disabled accounts upon recieving
the message; regular qmail did not have this feature but did accept them,
try to bounce them, bounce fails and the postmaster get's the double bounce.
> not significant compared to the total mail traffic. Processing power is no
> issue on mail servers (at least as long as such crap as virii scanners arent
> running).
I was talking about traffic, but you're right: spam and bounces have no big
attachments.
Greetings,
Erich
