Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
> Mikael Bak wrote:
>> Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
>>   
>>> Mikael Bak wrote:
>>>     
>>>> Santiago Romero wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>       
>>>>> Really, reject_unverified_recipient feature is very nice, but rejecting
>>>>> all mail when primary MX doesn't answers breaks it for us :(
>>>>>
>>>>> Any idea? :?
>>>>>     
>>>>>         
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Quoting the documentation[1]:
>>>>
>>>> "The unverified_recipient_defer_code parameter (default 450) specifies
>>>> the numerical Postfix SMTP server reply code when a recipient address
>>>> probe fails with some temporary error. Some sites insist on changing
>>>> this into 250. NOTE: This change turns MX servers into backscatter
>>>> sources when the load is high."
>>>>
>>>> So you are not rejecting any email if the MX is down. You are just
>>>> delaying reject or accept until the MX is asked if there is such user or
>>>> not. We're very happy with this over here.
>>>>   
>>>>       
>>> No, you are not "delaying reject".
>>> You are bouncing and possibly BackSattering because you really don't
>>> know if the recipient is valid.
>>>
>>> Many, many envelope recipients are forged these days.
>>> So you end up bouncing to the wrong place and sending spam to a 3rd party.
>>>
>>> A good MTA in the world will hold a 450 for 3 to 5 days and keep retrying.
>>> If it doesn't retry, it's usually a bot and bad for your health.
>>>
>>>     
>> Hi Brian,
>> Well, thank you for sharing this with me.
>>
>> IMO this setup does not bounce as you say, it sends a "450 Address
>> verification in progress. Try later.". When the client tries next time
>> there is either an OK the address exists, or a 550 User does not exist.
>>
>> Maybe I don't understand what you try to say. I just don't see why this
>> would generate bounces or backscatter.
>>
>> Mikael
>>
>>   
> I was referring to the "change to 250" that was quoted.
> I inferred that was the advice being given.
> 
> If this was incorrect, then, yes, it is just fine to use.

Hi Brian,
I knew that we were misunderstanding eachother. :-)

So to clarify. We have the unverified_recipient_defer_code parameter set
to its default (450).

Mikael

Reply via email to