On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, R-Elists wrote:
Charles Gregory Quote:Re: [sa] Re: SMTP REJECT after DATA
"The only efficiency to be gained is to reject as much as possible after the
RCPT_TO, before accepting DATA. But for systems like mine, with lousy user
cooperation, rejecting some of the mail
w way too much for anyone to have an argument with you...
if you cannot implement all processing and reject in DATA phase, then
well... there it is...
work on it...
your next post says you sometimes have to reject after... and i quote you
---
Charles Gregory Quote:Re: [sa] Re: SMTP REJECT after
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> It is NOT "illegal" to break a contract.
It's called 'fraud'. Look it up.
No, sorry, it's NOT fraud. Fraud requires proving an intentional
misrepresentation.
Well duh. Did you think I meant something else?
Breaking a contract does not imply th
Charles Gregory wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> There are other reasons not to do this, for instance legal ones.
Again, you are quoting arguments that favor SMTP reject. It is
better to
reject a mail, so that legitimate senders know it, rather than have
them
believe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Charles Gregory wrote:
> You are not misguided, and neither am I. We just have different situations.
>
>> Hmm... "policy". Sounds a lot like a feature of postfix, doesn't it?
>
> LOL... And not at all 'misguided' :)
Wait, stop the presses! A
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> There are other reasons not to do this, for instance legal ones.
Again, you are quoting arguments that favor SMTP reject. It is better to
reject a mail, so that legitimate senders know it, rather than have them
believe it was delivered when it was
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, David Morton wrote:
Charles Gregory wrote:
Indeed, it makes far LESS sense to have a system accept mail but send it
to a spam folder.
Maybe in your particular situation, but you can hardly apply that to
everyone
(nod) It was subject to the conditions I consider 'wide sprea
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Andy Dorman wrote:
So even if we can decide an email is spam before the DATA stage, it
makes no difference since we have to store the thing for a while anyway
in case the user wants to look for something caught that shouldn't be.
(nod) To rely on this methodology requires t
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
and you find it doesn't make sense to spam-scan messages and
reject them in/after DATA stage in a real world scenario.
You ignore my arguments. Hardly surprising.
You reword yours, but say nothing new.
It makes only sense if you are die-hard spam-fig
Charles Gregory wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Second: you are completely misguided in your wish to reject mail after
SMTP data stage.
You may certainly argue for YOUR preference (and I emphasise *preference*)
for the most 'efficient' way to run an SMTP server, but there is n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Charles Gregory wrote:
> Indeed, it makes far LESS sense to have a system accept mail but send it
> to a spam folder. That practice leaves the sender with the mistaken
> impression that their mail was sucessfully delivered. And argue as you
> will, the
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Assess that and you find it doesn't make sense to spam-scan messages and
reject them in/after DATA stage in a real world scenario.
I hesitate to jump onto this "firing range", but Kai has always seemed
reasonable.
We have very "real world" experience doing this sort of
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 08:03, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Charles, just a quick answer as we are really OT.
>
> It all simply boils down to (quoting me):
>
>> avoid unnecessary processing and avoid unncessary traffic.
>
> and I might add now: with the least disadvantages on both sides.
>
> Assess that a
Charles, just a quick answer as we are really OT.
It all simply boils down to (quoting me):
> avoid unnecessary processing and avoid unncessary traffic.
and I might add now: with the least disadvantages on both sides.
Assess that and you find it doesn't make sense to spam-scan messages and
r
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Second: you are completely misguided in your wish to reject mail after
SMTP data stage.
You may certainly argue for YOUR preference (and I emphasise *preference*)
for the most 'efficient' way to run an SMTP server, but there is nothing
sufficiently 'wron
15 matches
Mail list logo
