Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2007/05/22 15:50, Renaud Allard wrote: >> Stuart Henderson wrote: > > You wouldn't need spamd on the address of a send-only instance.. > (if mail's only submitted on 587/465 or from known address ranges, it > could just RST port 25 to the rest of the world).
Good point :) > >> Also, MS exchange servers don't like 4xx errors at DATA time and may >> forbid the mail from being delivered until the exchange instance is >> restarted. I know this is also a bug in Exchange, but many people use it. > > Yeuch... I didn't know about that. Found it here (needs user-agent: > googlebot) - http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/95332/95332.html > I have only seen this when the 4xx error is sent at DATA time, not when sent at RCPT TO. > How about: --i-dont-want-to-receive-mail-from-people-using-exchange-2003 > and --i-dont-want-to-receive-mail-from-people-using-callout-verification Those are the default flags indeed. > > I think a better solution would be for *more* people to use greylisting > implementations which do this, so that more MSexchange users will either > bother Microsoft to fix their bug, or script 'net stop smtpsvc;net start > smtpsvc' to run a few times a day so they can send mail to others too. Most of the time with people running exchange, they don't care and don't have a clue about what happens and argue that _your_ server is broken because they don't have problems elsewhere. [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/x-pkcs7-signature which had a name of smime.p7s]
