On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Steven W. Orr wrote: > =>> Is it worthwhile to try to convince the SA dev > =>> crowd to add greylist functionality?
> Neither. What I'm looking for is a rubust way to say: "I haven't > seen mail from this guy before so I'm going to reject his email > with a 450 error code. If email from him tries for delivery after > (let's say) four hours, then I will accept it and nevermore will > this guy have a delay in sending me mail." That's the common definition of "greylisting". I think the suggestion to add it to SA misses a basic fact: the mail has *already been received in its entirety* by the time SA gets a chance to see it. What's the point in greylisting then? Proper greylisting is done early in the SMTP exchange, at the point the DATA command is sent and the sender and recipients are known but before the message itself has been received. I use milter-greylist to do this and it works well. -- John Hardin KA7OHZ ICQ#15735746 http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a [EMAIL PROTECTED] key: 0xB8732E79 - 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- What nuts do with guns is terrible, certainly. But what evil or crazy people do with *anything* is not a valid argument for banning that item. -- John C. Randolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
