On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 09:17:29 -0600, David Hoffman <dhoffman2004@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 15:02:06 +0000, Paul Howarth <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > David Hoffman wrote: > > > That being said.... my intention, if I can find a viable solution, was > > > to try using greylisting, followed by RBLs, and then possibly backed > > > up with SpamAssassin or ClamAV. Basically take TMDA out of the picture > > > altogether. > > > > > > The reason I was asking for information was not to start a C/R flame > > > war. It was because some articles on greylisting talk about how > > > non-compliant MTAs can break the greylisting system by NOT sending > > > back legitimate messages after the delay, or by seeing the delay > > > response as an error and reporting it back to the original sender. > > > > > > All I wanted to know is if anyone has seen issues like that and how to > > > get around them. > > > > I think most of the issues you're likely to run into have already been > > mentioned. If you keep an eye on your mail logs for a while after > > implementing greylisting then you're likely to spot any problem. > > > > However, I think greylisting is only a short to medium term solution. As > > soon as someone really big (e.g. AOL or hotmail) implements greylisting, > > the spammers will evolve their software to handle it, and you'll be back > > where you started. This isn't going to be a big problem for them, but > > it's just not worth the effort for them at the moment, as relatively few > > sites are using greylisting. > > > > OK. > > These last two comments were basically what I was hoping for. This was > not a thread for the pro/anti C/R issues. > > Thank you Scott and Paul. > OK Timing was off. It was comments from Scott and Paul that were helpful. I am American too, but that has nothing to do with the topic.
