On Thursday, May 26, 2005, 13:36:19, Len Conrad wrote: >>So if Imail actually used tarpitting it'd be a detriment. > > yes, ANY MX is at risk of hurting itself with tarpitting, unless the > tarpitting agent is carefully designed not to spend a full SMTP session per > tarpit but uses some kind of dummy placeholder tarpitting agent. Even that > agent needs a tcp socket per tarpitted IP, so tarpitting exhausting the tcp > sockets resource has to be addressed.
An example of such an agent is OpenBSD's spamd - spam deferral daemon http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=spamd -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The avalanche has already started, it is too Rod Dorman late for the pebbles to vote." � Ambassador Kosh To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
