On Saturday 20 September 2003 06:22 pm, Gabriel Rosa wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 06:15:32PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Sat 20 Sep 03, 6:15 PM, Ken Herron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > --On Saturday, September 20, 2003 04:24:56 PM -0700 Rod Roark > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > >Cool. I wonder if there's an easy way to get Postfix to > > > >notice these attachments at the front door, and drop the > > > >connection before all 150K or whatever have been received. > > > > > > Well, if the remote end sees the connection drop in mid-session, it'll > > > typically save the message and try to deliver it again later. So this > > > feature wouldn't be all that useful. > > > -- > > > Ken Herron > > > > why not? > > > > let them huff. let them puff. and after 3 days, they'll give up on the > > delivery. > > > > The point being that 3 days of huffing and puffing might end up costing you > more bandwidth than if you just swallow the message :)
Well, you get the satisfaction of wasting the sender's bandwidth too. And for me at least, as a DSL user, incoming bandwidth is cheaper than outgoing. As for the Postfix solution that I actually implemented, it's a bit unclear if the entire message is received, but I suspect it is. The sender definitely gets closed out with a rejection message, not just a dropped connection. At least the offending mail is not saved to disk and does not require another pass from procmail or SpamAssassin or whatever. -- Rod http://www.sunsetsystems.com/ _______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
