On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Ross Vandegrift wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 02:20:16AM -0600, David B Funk wrote: > > If you SMTP reject the spam, it never hits your queue, so no problem > > with the garbage piling up and no bombarding poor innocent 'joe-job' > > victims. It's better than auto-deleting spam, as a legit message > > that is accidentally mis-identified as spam gets returned to the > > true sender and they can remedy the situation rather than wondering > > what happened to their message. > > I hope you see the contradiction in the above paragraph.
There's no contradiction; he said "SMTP reject" which implies a 5xx response at some point in the SMTP protocol, not a queue-then-bounce. 5xx rejects sometimes cause "bombarding poor innocent 'joe-job' victims" but only if the messages are passing through a relay that has already done the queue-then-(deliver or bounce) part. On a direct connect from the sender's MTA to yours, a 5xx reject will only affect the actual sender (regardless of MAIL FROM: forgery), which is what you want in the case of legitimate (e.g. accidentally misaddressed) email. > I had spamass-milter setup to reject for a while, and I found that my > queues were always full. spamass-milter is not rejecting during SMTP, then -- or you have a gateway server that's doing the queue-and-bounce, with spamass-milter running elsewhere. In that case you should be doing the rejecting at the gateway. ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
