Jason_Meers wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This is a new post quoting a section of a previous post.
> 
> -snip-
> Background:
> The idea is to develop a config that could determine which MX record had 
> been used to make the initial connection (by getting the firewall to 
> forward the SMTP conversation to different ports on the same server, 
> based on the IP address the connection initially came in on).
> This would avoid having to have a dedicated box and dedicated config for 
> each MX preference.
> -snip-
> 
> 
> I'm seeing a lot of junk-mail deliberately going for the lower 
> preference MX records first (by lower preference I mean MX records with 
> a higher numerical value than the others). The thought is to be more 
> strict/thorough about checking connections that are initially made to 
> the "wrong" MX (because I don't expect this of a "genuine" properly 
> configured MTA).
> 
> Is it acceptable to just dump connections that make no attempt to follow 
> the RFC's and go directly for the lower pref MX's.

Not really.... see below...

> I have 5 other boxes 
> (in separate locations) that _should_ have been tried before anyone 
> would have a valid reason to connect directly to the lowest pref box.
> 
> Is anybody else already doing this?
> Does it work for you?
> 
> Thanks
> Jason_Meers
> 
> 

Mark Perkel has posted a great deal about his methodology of using 
'bait' MX cleverly to trap/divert spam.

Personally, I think that approach just 'plays' with spam sources that 
can easily be blocked by simpler means (lack of a PTR RR and/or dynamic 
IP RBL-hit at the top of *my* list. YMMV).

But the larger issue is that if you *publish* a DNS entry for an MX - 
regardless of its priority - then you should damn well be prepared to 
accept 'normal' traffic on it.

ELSE - don't publish it, as you are contributing to breaking 
RFC-mandated behaviour for the many who *need* backup MX to function as 
expected.

Spam is by no means the only driver for selecting a lower-priority MX, 
and two wrongs don't make a right - complaints or lack therof 
notwithstanding.

Bill


-- 
## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users 
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/

Reply via email to