W B Hacker wrote: > Marc Perkel wrote: > > >>>> The idea here is I return a temp error 1 in 5 times. Not enough to >>>> block them. But enough to maybe get people's attention when they look >>>> at their logs. Hopefully someone will notice it and fix it. >>>> >>>> I recommend that everyone do this and if they did it would improve >>>> things in general. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> If you do at least a host -v, dig, or whois on a sampling of those >>> arrivals, you will probably find yourself trying to modify the >>> behaviour of zombified WinBoxen on dynamic IP. >>> >>> Hardly likely to 'improve things in general' - unless you own stock in >>> the local power grid. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >> Yes - I have it at the end of a lot of other tests so it's not doing it >> to zombie bots. >> >> > > Well then you might consider the *other* thing you have overlooked: > > No one, human, animal, or computer - will pay much attention to a log entry > that > may not even appear, or at least not with the details you sent - for a > delivery > attempt that *eventually* gets through. > > 'Defer' won't cut that, and even 'drop/deny' may be ignored. > > If you intend to put something 'in your face' for that remote sysadmin, then > you > will want to use: > > accept > control = fakereject/<message> > > So that the *senders* harass their sysadmin to fix the problem. > > Otherwise, that individual owes you Jack Squat, will do SQRT-Future > Activities > about his PTR, but *will* show up on this list wingeing about how rude we are > to > actually enforce RFC 822 and subsequent in the face of his budget > limitations... > > Bill >
That's an interesting idea. -- ## 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/
