Re: Eliminating "noise" from secondary MX

2003-06-25 Thread David Landgren
Karl Pielorz wrote: [...] Or, secondly - as was cleverly suggested to me a while ago - setup a 3rd MX that has a IN A PTR to your primary MX, and make it the highest priority... e.g. mx0.mydomain.com PRI 20 mx1.mydomain.com PRI 30 mx2.mydomain.com PRI 40 (Which is really just a diff

Re: Eliminating "noise" from secondary MX

2003-06-23 Thread Karl Pielorz
--On 23 June 2003 08:48 -0600 Brett Glass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip] The secondary mail exchanger tries to send the message on to its destination, but the mail is bounced by the primary mail host (either as spam or because it has been sent to an invalid address). So, the secondary dutifu

Re: Eliminating "noise" from secondary MX

2003-06-23 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Jun 23), Brett Glass said: > Here's more detail. A spammer sends to a nonexistent address in a > domain for which the host is a secondary mail exchanger. Many > spammers' software is actually set up to use secondary mail > exchangers rather than primaries, because they're less

Eliminating "noise" from secondary MX

2003-06-23 Thread Brett Glass
We have a FreeBSD machine, running Sendmail, that's set up as a secondary MX for several domains. Lately, as the tide of spam continues to increase, this machine is sending large volumes of messages to "Postmaster", and this is interfering with normal monitoring of the server. Here's more deta