OK, I won't try it. But I will ask a few questions about the motivation behind some of the practices mentioned.
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 14:39, Marc Sherman wrote: > This has been discussed many times before on this list; that is very > risky, as for every site that refuses your mail with a 550 on the RCPT, > you'll see a dozen that either wait till the end of DATA to refuse > (which you'll never reach on a callout), Why would you configure that way? It doesn't reduce incoming traffic, which I thought was the goal of blacklisting. > or accepts after DATA and then > dumps the message in a spam quarantine or even /dev/null -- possibly > after learning it as spam in their bayesian filter, poisoning your > attempts to resend a week later through the smarthost when your > intended recipient calls you to ask where that email you said you sent > last week was. That seems like a strange way to train a Bayesian filter. Shouldn't a Bayesian analyser be trained on manually tagged data (i.e. mails that a human has classified as good and bad)? > We're not being belligerent when we say that what you want can't be > done; we're being helpful, because we've seen all these options > proposed and shot down multiple times in the past. Understood. -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
