Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:23 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Sandy's 5xx event sink
Markus,
Just last week Comcast lit up a new mail server that had no reverse DNS
entry. This type of thing happens all the time. Plus there mi
bject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Sandy's
5xx event sink
Markus,Just last week Comcast lit up a new mail server that
had no reverse DNS entry. This type of thing happens all the time.
Plus there might be an issue with timeouts if your software can't
differentiate between
y, January 12, 2006 2:15 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Sandy's 5xx event sink
Hi, Markus-
We don't block on a missing PTR record, but some people do.
There are people who block if the PTR record doesn't match
the HELO or EHLO string, and some who bl
;s some legit stuff coming in to us that
> lacks a PTR record.
>
> For us, the PTR record check is just one of the tests we run.
> It is weighted heavily, but it is not decisive by itself.
>
> -Dave Doherty
> Skywaves, Inc.
>
>
> ----- Original Message
ighted
heavily, but it is not decisive by itself.
-Dave Doherty
Skywaves, Inc.
- Original Message -
From: "Markus Gufler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:38 AM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Sandy's 5xx event sink
... <
With
I've tried it out and it seems running fine. But for our situation I need
something that is able to verify trough an external application and on the
recipients pop3-server in realtime if the mailbox is valid. So we've tested
Xwall and it seems running fine with more then 100k Messages/day.
At the
> Has this caused any issues with mail rejection when its being
> updated (for example what if the event sink can't access the file
> while it was being updated).
It won't reject in that case; it will allow the recipient. Rather than
building in an extended lock-and-retry sequence, wh
