Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)

2008-10-15 Diskussionsfäden Daniele Guazzoni
Don't blame greylisting for this behavior. Queue-and-retry was an option but it is mandatory since RFC-2821. The very obsolete RFC-821 stated that "clients should retry". In the old RFC-2119 it was explained that "should" means recommended. The actual RFC-2821 states clearly that: - "the

Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)

2008-10-15 Diskussionsfäden Tonnerre Lombard
Salut, Marco, On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:01:06 +0200, Marco wrote: > we made the experience that not greylisting itself is the problem. the > problem are miss configured mailservers with wrong queue times or > servers interpreting the greylisting "temp error" code as an "error". The problem is that y

Re: [swinog] Network device tester/packet generator

2008-10-15 Diskussionsfäden Jeroen Massar
Aarno Aukia wrote: > Inspired by a thread on cisco-nsp > (https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2008-October/055260.html) I > was wondering if there was network device testing/packet generating > equipment (be it a Spirent SmartBits or Agilent N2X (thanks for > sponsoring Swinog-13) or anythi

[swinog] Network device tester/packet generator

2008-10-15 Diskussionsfäden Aarno Aukia
Inspired by a thread on cisco-nsp ( https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2008-October/055260.html) I was wondering if there was network device testing/packet generating equipment (be it a Spirent SmartBits or Agilent N2X (thanks for sponsoring Swinog-13)or anything similar) to borrow/for ren

Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)

2008-10-15 Diskussionsfäden Beat Siegenthaler
Daniel Kamm wrote: > There are times, where the sending MTAs queue size is far to big for > the MTA to meet the queue times. I saw such problems multiple times. > When graylisting is configured for too short acceptance time, you will > have messages, which won't be transmitted. > # How lo

Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)

2008-10-15 Diskussionsfäden Daniel Kamm
On Oct 15, 2008, at 11:01 AM, Marco wrote: > we made the experience that not greylisting itself is the problem. the > problem are miss configured mailservers with wrong queue times or > servers interpreting the greylisting "temp error" code as an "error". There are times, where the sending MTAs q

Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)

2008-10-15 Diskussionsfäden Marco
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Am 11 Sep 2008 um 5:17 hat Stanislav Sinyagin geschrieben: > > >>> Greylisting only delays mails. Proper spammers just use ISP relays and >>> > how about registering on an page and waiting for the accept email for hours > because your ISP do graylisting ? > > t