On Oct 18, 2006, at 5:55 AM, Andrew - Supernews wrote: >>>>>> "David" == David Saez Padros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> In the best case (when there isn't a specific spammer actively >>> forging just our domain) we see about 100 times as many abusive >>> callouts (ones not in response to mail we sent) as >>> legitimate/excusable callouts (ones caused by mail that actually >>> came from us), and about 10% of our incoming SMTP connections are >>> from blowback sources (callouts, C/R and bounce blowback - we >>> can't reliably distinguish them). > > David> so for this 10% you don't know how many bounces are callouts > David> or real bounces ? then how you know which are abusive and > David> which not ? > > All of them are abusive, because all of them are an attempt to send > either a bounce, a C/R message or a callout in response to mail that > we did not send. > >>> Having a whitelist for known _legitimate_ senders does not reduce >>> in any way the number of _abusive_ callouts you do, by definition. > > David> what you perceive as abusive callouts are protective in my > David> point of view. > > But you're forcing me to devote _my_ resources to protecting _your_ > network. How is this not abusive?
You volunteered up front to be responsible for the email addresses. Being responsible means we do things that otherwise provide us no benefit. Chad --- Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Your Web App and Email hosting provider chad at shire.net -- ## 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/
