--On 29 August 2007 16:23:48 -0700 Jeroen van Aart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Graeme Fowler wrote:
>> that's fine. If, however, you drop, reject, blackhole or otherwise send
>> AWOL a time-critical [0] message destined to one of your customers and
>> cause, ooh, a business deadline to be miss
Graeme Fowler wrote:
> All together now: "Plusnet" !!!
Ok, blatant stupidity (or evil intent) is not what I refered to. :-)
Regards,
Jeroen
--
## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - ht
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 16:23 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> I don't think one can blame an email provider for lost email just as one
> can't blame a telephone provider for dropped or missed calls. Or at
> least it should be that way. Plus I am sure any sane email provider adds
> a nice long disclai
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 23:20 +0100, Martin A. Brooks wrote:
> Omniscience being the obvious candidate.
I shall duly add that to the Exim5 wishlist :)
Graeme
--
## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki wi
- Original Message -
From: "Jeroen van Aart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: [exim] An interesting observation about spam zombies
> I don't think one can blame an email provider for lost email just as one
> can&#
Graeme Fowler wrote:
> that's fine. If, however, you drop, reject, blackhole or otherwise send
> AWOL a time-critical [0] message destined to one of your customers and
> cause, ooh, a business deadline to be missed, then you'd best be
> prepared for several long talks with your lawyer.
I don't thi
Graeme Fowler wrote:
> It needs work, in my opinion, but it could be a reasonable assistant to
> other technologies.
>
Omniscience being the obvious candidate.
--
Martin A. Brooks | http://www.antibodymx.net/ | Anti-spam & anti-virus
Consultant| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | filterin
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 14:42 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Keep in mind Phil that these are fake high numbers MX records that
> normal server never access even if they are correct. So if you add in
> the expired fake MX factor then it starts getting pretty safe.
I refer the honourable gentleman to
Phil (Medway Hosting) wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Marc Perkel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 6:23 PM
> Subject: [exim] An interesting observation about spam zombies
>
>
>
>> As some of you k
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 18:48 +0100, Graeme Fowler wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 10:23 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> > As some of you know I get rid of a lot of spam using fake high numbered
> > MX records. I'm now doing some interesting experiments. Even though my
> > TTL is only 2 hours I notice
Graeme Fowler wrote:
> In the olden days, when AOL used to be a Really Big Player (!), there
> were many uncorroborated and persistent rumours that they (and several
> other large ISPs) used to deliberately ignore DNS zone and resource
> TTls, and forced them to be much longer than the zone adminis
Marc Perkel wrote:
> My theort is that spam zombies do DNS caching so as to maximize spam
> output by eliminating dns lookups. Thus zombies retain old information
> far longer than they are supposed to.
>
> So I'm experimenting with a blaclisting trick where I change my fake
> high MX records, w
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 10:23 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> As some of you know I get rid of a lot of spam using fake high numbered
> MX records. I'm now doing some interesting experiments. Even though my
> TTL is only 2 hours I notice that if I change my fake high MX to
> different fake high MX tha
- Original Message -
From: "Marc Perkel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 6:23 PM
Subject: [exim] An interesting observation about spam zombies
> As some of you know I get rid of a lot of spam using fake high numbered
> MX recor
Hmmm... over the years I've run into many instances where short TTLs
(and in fact any TTL in some cases) have been ignored by some (many) of
the big ISPs - again, sometimes for a month or more (AOL for example)
These instances were for A records mostly as things like web sites and
ftp sites were mo
As some of you know I get rid of a lot of spam using fake high numbered
MX records. I'm now doing some interesting experiments. Even though my
TTL is only 2 hours I notice that if I change my fake high MX to
different fake high MX that the spam zombies still send email to the old
fake MX record
16 matches
Mail list logo
