>> On 26.05.10 07:01, Sam Varshavchik wrote: >>> All of this incurs non-trivial per message overhead. Issuing a DNS >>> query, and/or querying the local account database, is not free, and >>> the penalty now applies to every message. A judgement call needs to >>> be made whether the additional overhead is justified by the value >>> added.
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes: >> I'm aware of all of this. However all (except sender address verification) >> the overhead will still happen, but later in delivery chain, in which case On 28.05.10 18:08, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > A second time. Twice as much overhead, now. since there's e.g. more spam than ham, I still find many checks at SMTP time as win. >>> As the old saying goes: build an idiot-proof process, and nature will >>> evolve a better idiot. >> >> Do you mean we shouldn't build idiot-proof processes because of this? > > A completely idiot-proof solution is often impossible. Nearly all the > time this is reduced to a judgement call, whether the extra bang for the > buck is worth the additional penalty. well, I'm guessing it is worth it. Seems you are guessing the oposite... but it's hard to judge without trying it. I hope that the courieresmtpd code is easy enough to patch for this functionality... -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [email protected] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Christian Science Programming: "Let God Debug It!". ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
