On Fri, 15 May 2009, Chris Hoogendyk wrote: > I use milter-greylist [...] > It's a royal pain in the butt dealing with all > the emails that all of my users try to send, and undoubtedly lots of it > falls through the cracks. There are a lot of non-compliant mail servers > out there -- big ones as well as small ones -- that fail for one reason > or another. Some have their queue runners botched up so that, when > greylisted, they don't come around to resend for many hours.
Let me see, you're the one that is giving a temporary failure to every incoming email and YOU are complaining about "non-compliant mail servers" ? It's like returning a busy signal to all incoming phone calls and assuming that "The important ones will just ring back" so they will get though. But you also assume: 1. The will call back *exactly* between 1 and 3 minutes later 2. You will see exactly the same caller-id second time around. 3. They will bother calling back at all. 4. Phone markets won't learn to do the same thing. The fact that you are complaining about how much work it is indicates to be that you didn't research the pros and cons of the anti-spam method in the first place. -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT. _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
