Les Mikesell wrote: > The point here is that it is up to the sender to retry. If you tempfail > the first attempt you have no control over how long it will be until the > next attempt happens. If the sender has a big queue, it could be 4 > hours or more. That *could* happen. In practice, I've not seen it. In any event, it would happen only once for a given sending MTA. If that is the price I have to pay for reducing incoming SPAM by over 80% it is well worth it. In a short period of time all of those MTA's will long delays will be cached. I bet those people that fret over this also have their user agents set to poll for new mail every minute. > At the very least you should permit a sending host once it is known to > retry. Some schemes match up senders/recipients - which is appropriate > for the first connection, but once you know a host is going to retry you > might as well let it through. That is what the cache does....without any human intervention. -- Don't be overly suspicious where it's not warranted.
