It is indeed a "poor mans greylisting". Real greylisting is however much more effective. Reasonably large amounts of spam is targeted directly at the backup mailserver and will come through.
It doesn't seem have the drawback that greylisting has: possible large delays. But it did make me think of a possible solution for that in greylisting. What if you would have primary and secondary MX point to two different IP's on the same host. Both IP's do accept mail and run the same greylisting filter. Currently, greylisting will only start accepting mail from one sender if it retries (for example) 15 or more minutes after the first attempt. And MTA's can take much longer before doing a second attempt on the same MX. With both MX's pointing to one machine (two IP's), we could instruct Greylisting to accept mails without delay if we have first seen an attempt on the primary IP, and now get one on the sencondary. XMailserver has a *LOCALADDR-variable that will help with this.* If the information on that site is correct, then most MTA's would retry on the second MX almost instantly after trying on the first one. So there basically is hardly any delay. Do take into account that the delay does also has its benefits. Spam that is delayed, is more likely to be captured by an other filter (blacklist, Pyzor, Razor, DCC, ...). Any thoughts? Sincerely, Bart Mortelmans Filip Supera wrote: > Hello, > > Just heard about this in the Spamtools mailing list : > > http://www.joreybump.com/code/howto/nolisting.html > > Any thought ? > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in > the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
