Re: [vchkpw] Why not disconnect after rejection/limit ?

2006-03-04 Thread Michael Krieger
Jeremy Kister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/3/2006 10:28 AM, Michael Krieger wrote:An SMTP server MUST NOT intentionally close the connection except:- After receiving a QUIT command and responding with a 221 reply. - After detecting the need to shut down the SMTP service and returning a

[vchkpw] Why not disconnect after rejection/limit ?

2006-03-03 Thread Ibiltari
Hi, I'm trying to fine tune my mail system, and looking at how qmail-smtpd/vchkpw handle rejected mail i started thinking; why qmail-smtp doesn't disconnect after the intrusion threshold? it keeps rejecting messages (from the spammer normally) and eating cpu and band whit. Perhaps there is a good

Re: [vchkpw] Why not disconnect after rejection/limit ?

2006-03-03 Thread Jeremy Kister
On 3/3/2006 10:28 AM, Michael Krieger wrote: An SMTP server MUST NOT intentionally close the connection except: - After receiving a QUIT command and responding with a 221 reply. - After detecting the need to shut down the SMTP service and returning a 421 response code. This response

Re: [vchkpw] Why not disconnect after rejection/limit ?

2006-03-03 Thread Jorge Valdes
Jeremy Kister wrote: On 3/3/2006 10:28 AM, Michael Krieger wrote: An SMTP server MUST NOT intentionally close the connection except: - After receiving a QUIT command and responding with a 221 reply. - After detecting the need to shut down the SMTP service and returning a 421 response