|
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Magnus Holmgren
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 148
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:20 pm Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
On Monday 17 July 2006 23:27, Thomas Bushnell BSG took the opportunity to
write:
| Quote: | Magnus Holmgren <holmgren@lysator.liu.se> writes:
Deal with it when people complain. Also, this kind of information can be
shared so that not every mail admin has to find it out himself by users
complaining.
Are you willing to promise that if someone gives a genuine complaint
about how this is blocking their legitimat email, you will amend your
practice to deal, rather than to insist that they should change
theirs?
|
Parse error. If someone complains because their mail servers are too spread
out, I'd whitelist them. If someone complains because their own software is
broken, well, that depends. I would explain to them nicely why they should
fix it, but I wouldn't argue unless I have a good reason to do so. Nothing
needs to be amended.
--
Magnus Holmgren holmgren@lysator.liu.se
(No Cc of list mail needed, thanks) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Josselin Mouette
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Posts: 319
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:50 pm Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
Le lundi 17 juillet 2006 à 22:29 +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
| Quote: | On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 08:36:31AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
Quoting Wolfgang Lonien (wolfgang@lonien.de):
Do we use greylisting on the @debian.org domain and especially on
@lists.debian.org?
So, up to now, we've found Thomas Bushnell who seems really hardly
voting against greylisting on Debian hosts, (...).
So far and unless I forget someone, I haven't seen much other people
being strongly opposed to greylisting on Debian hosts,
Here is one: I am strongly opposed to greylisting (on mail sent to me
or that I send), for the reason that it delays legitimate mail.
|
I have refused greylisting for a long time for that exact reason.
However the setup Pierre Habouzit describes does not delay most of
legitimate mail. Frankly, the remaining delays are sporadic and one can
live with them.
I'm applying greylisting if one of these conditions is met:
* the incoming IP is listed in a DUL;
* Exim sender/callout fails with a fatal error.
This setup has considerably reduced both the load and the amount of spam
on the server. However I still have to deal with @debian.org spam with a
less and less efficient (and more and more cpu consuming) bayesian
filter, as it cannot be filtered out this way.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\
: :' : josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org
`. `' joss@debian.org
`- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marco d'Itri
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 401
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:50 pm Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
On Jul 17, Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Still, if you think it's just nitpicking, then why not ask the IETF to
amend the standard to clearly permit this practice?
Because there is no reason to do this, this is not a standard issue but |
plain operations.
--
ciao,
Marco |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pierre HABOUZIT
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 6:40 am Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
Le mar 18 juillet 2006 00:08, Magnus Holmgren a écrit :
| Quote: | On Monday 17 July 2006 23:41, Pierre Habouzit took the opportunity to
write:
Le lun 17 juillet 2006 19:53, Adrian von Bidder a écrit :
So the question is, imho, not if we should potentially lock out
users of big mail pools - those are in the default whitelists
anyway by now. The question is: can we temporarily (until they
can be whitelisted) lock out users of
"standards?-who-needs-standards?" systems that don't implement
sensible queueing. Many of these sites are small - but there are
also a few bigger names: Yahoo groups, Amazon, Roche, Motorola.
(According to postgrey's default whitelist. Some of these are
from 2004 or earlier, and AFAIK nobody tries to verify if these
systems are still stupid in that way.)
OTOH those systems are not listed on RBL's (or it does not last)
and you won't greylist them.
Which RBL's do you have in mind? I mean, some RBL's, like XBL/SBL,
are high-quality enough that you can outright reject. Others, like
SpamCop, are likely to include some of the bigger names from time to
time. DUL lists might be good candidates.
|
I personnaly use DUL, rfc-ignorant and XBL/SBL.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lionel Elie Mamane
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 100
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:40 am Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:48:21PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
| Quote: | Le lun 17 juillet 2006 22:29, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
Here is one: I am strongly opposed to greylisting (on mail sent to
me or that I send), for the reason that it delays legitimate mail.
which shows that you didn't read the discussion
|
Wrong. Disagreeing with you is not the same as not reading your
arguments. Sorry that you were not convincing.
| Quote: | that was about enabling greylisting on *certain* *specificaly*
*suspicious* hosts.
|
I know.
| Quote: | a suspicious host is:
* either listed on some RBL's (rbl listing "dynamic" blocks are a good
start usually)
* either having no reverse DNS set
* either having curious EHLO lines (that one may catch too much good
mail sadly, so it's to handle with care).
* ...
|
This will still include legitimate mail.
| Quote: | I apply greylisting on the two first criteriums on a quite used mail
server (around 300.k mails per week, which is not very big, but should
be representative enough).
there is less than 50 mails a week over those that *may* be
legitimate mails that are actually slowed down.
|
Bingo: Legitimate mail slowed down. You think the price is worth it,
which is a valid opinion. I happen not to think so.
Usually when mail I send gets greylisted, it is because the software
thinks I am "suspicious".
| Quote: | so *please* do me a favour, read the thread you are answering to,
|
I did.
| Quote: | because you really really answer miles away from the debate.
|
No, I'm not. I'm expressing an opinion after reading all of the
debate, from the points of it I remember.
| Quote: | and if you never actually realized, there *IS* such a slowdown on
debian mail lists, it's called crossassassin, it kills master on a
regular basis, and is *REALLY* less effective than greylisting.
|
I don't remember the "master cannot cope under mail load, we need
desperate measures" point being brought up before. I may have missed
it.
Best Regards,
--
Lionel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Wuertele
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:50 am Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
* Stephen Gran <sgran@debian.org> [2006-07-17 18:43]:
| Quote: | It's not uncommon for big sites to have pools of high throughput
machines that don't have qrunners, and larger pools of machines that do.
The first group gets a message, and tries to deliver immediately, and
any temporary failure gets the messages shunted to the secondary pool.
Once in the secondary pool, it can be bounced from machine to machine
to load balance queue size and so on.
That being said, the original query about this was a strawman argument
designed specifically to find a problem, and I would say fairly
confidently we don't need to worry about this. I have analyzed the logs
on mail servers I have access to, and I cannot find any site which passes
a message between more than a half dozen or at most a dozen IP addresses
before delivery. This is two or three orders of magnitude less than
the kind of thing Thomas and others are concerned about. By the time
sites big enough to use pools that big exist (which I actually doubt -
scalability might just be too hard to manage to be worth it), greylisting
will be another dead tool in the arms race with spammers.
So far, all the arguments against the idea have just been assertions and
strawmen. Unless someone can present a serious argument, can we
consider this thread done?
|
I've been using greylisting with postgrey and whitelists for some time
now (more than a year to be precise) and I still do get mail from gmail,
yahoo and msn accounts. And if one is so concerned about them one could
contact their postmasters asking for a list of IPs for whitelisting.
After all we are talking about developers @debian.org email addresses
not abouts lists.debian.org.
yours Martin
--
<maxx@debian.org> ---- Debian GNU/Linux - The Universal Operating System
* Myon wirft noch ein paar 'f' zum Verteilein in den Channel
-!- florolf is now known as fflorolff |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lionel Elie Mamane
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 100
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:50 am Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 12:47:49AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
| Quote: | Le lundi 17 juillet 2006 à 22:29 +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 08:36:31AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
Quoting Wolfgang Lonien (wolfgang@lonien.de):
Do we use greylisting on the @debian.org domain and especially on
@lists.debian.org?
So, up to now, we've found Thomas Bushnell who seems really hardly
voting against greylisting on Debian hosts, (...).
So far and unless I forget someone, I haven't seen much other
people being strongly opposed to greylisting on Debian hosts,
Here is one: I am strongly opposed to greylisting (on mail sent to
me or that I send), for the reason that it delays legitimate mail.
I have refused greylisting for a long time for that exact reason.
However the setup Pierre Habouzit describes does not delay most of
legitimate mail.
|
That is the crux of the disagreement. You guys think that as long as
"most" of the legitimate mail is not delayed, the price is worth it. I
don't think so.
| Quote: | Frankly, the remaining delays are sporadic and one can live with
them.
|
Knowing that most legitimate mail doesn't get delayed doesn't make me
feel better when mail I sit waiting for gets delayed. Obviously, for
most mail I don't care as I don't sit waiting for it, I batch-treat it
a fez times per day or per week. So a half-hour delay on it, I don't
even see it. For *most* mail.
| Quote: | I'm applying greylisting if one of these conditions is met:
* the incoming IP is listed in a DUL;
|
Bingo! You hit a hot button of mine.
| Quote: | * Exim sender/callout fails with a fatal error.
|
"Fatal" means not temporary?
--
Lionel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Josselin Mouette
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Posts: 319
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:00 am Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
Le mardi 18 juillet 2006 à 09:47 +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
| Quote: | That is the crux of the disagreement. You guys think that as long as
"most" of the legitimate mail is not delayed, the price is worth it. I
don't think so.
|
If too much spam gets through, *all* legitimate mail gets delayed. It
gets delayed by the additional filters it has to get through thereafter,
and it gets delayed by having to dig it out of a mailbox full of spam.
| Quote: | * Exim sender/callout fails with a fatal error.
"Fatal" means not temporary?
|
It means either the domain doesn't exist, or the server explicitly
replied the user doesn't exist.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\
: :' : josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org
`. `' joss@debian.org
`- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pierre HABOUZIT
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:00 am Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
Le mar 18 juillet 2006 09:34, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
| Quote: | This will still include legitimate mail.
|
something like 50 over 300k is less than 0.016%.
which is also really less than the usual number of false positives of
your bayesian mail filter. see end of mail.
| Quote: | and if you never actually realized, there *IS* such a slowdown on
debian mail lists, it's called crossassassin, it kills master on a
regular basis, and is *REALLY* less effective than greylisting.
I don't remember the "master cannot cope under mail load, we need
desperate measures" point being brought up before. I may have missed
it.
|
these days master has a high load on a regular basis:
load average: 239.68, 299.68, 326.84
from IRC a couple of days ago,
What I experience as a debian developer is that:
* 80% of the overall spam that eventually comes into my inbox went
through my debian.org account, that renders the read of such a
mailbox really hard, and I'm pretty sure that I miss more than 0.016%
of legitimate mail in my readings.
* my @debian.org address has considerable slowdowns due to our MXs
beeing overloaded from time to time. 80% of the time, it's because of
crossassassin becoming mad, or some spam attack.
Just take some factual numbers: I receive sth like 300 mails a day (top,
I think the mean value is more around 150). that makes 109.500 mails a
year. I know for a fact that my bayesian filter makes sth like 4 to 5
errors per year. And yes I know how to train one. So my bayesian mail
filter has at least a 0.05% false positive rate, and I'm really
convinced in fact it's more like 0.1% (maybe even more).
SA is used extensively on debian hosts, I'm also quite sure it also has
worse rates than a 0.1%. So you are claiming that greylisting is a
really bad method ? come on !
currently, I receive so many spams from debian, that I just CANT sort
them. it's sth like 90spams a *day* sometimes. How do you find the time
to look at the good mails in there ? I can't. So by not delaying 0.016%
of the legitimate mails, you make a lot of people *LOOSE* for real way
more than that.
please, your point is only made of impressions, now you have numbers.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lionel Elie Mamane
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 100
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:10 am Post subject:
Measuring "should I greylist?" false positive rate [was: greylisting on debian.org?]
|
|
|
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:48:21PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
| Quote: | Le lun 17 juillet 2006 22:29, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
|
| Quote: | the discussion (...) was about enabling greylisting on *certain*
*specificaly* *suspicious* hosts. a suspicious
host is:
* either listed on some RBL's (rbl listing "dynamic" blocks are a good
start usually)
* either having no reverse DNS set
* either having curious EHLO lines (that one may catch too much good
mail sadly, so it's to handle with care).
* ...
I apply greylisting on the two first criteriums on a quite used mail
server (around 300.k mails per week, which is not very big, but
should be representative enough).
there is less than 50 mails a week over those that *may* be
legitimate mails that are actually slowed down.
|
On second thought, I'm very interested in how you measured this false
positive rate. Do all the recipients of the 300k mails per week check
for every mail if it was greylisted (that means you would put a header
or something like that saying "this mail was greylisted"?), and they
_always_ check on _every_ legitimate mail and _always_ report false
positives to you? Probably not. So, are these 50 mails a week all the
mail that undergoes greylisting but *still* goes through (i.e. gets
retried, roughly)? Something else?
--
Lionel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pierre HABOUZIT
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:10 am Post subject:
Re: Measuring "should I greylist?" false positive rate [was: greylisting on debian.org?]
|
|
|
Le mar 18 juillet 2006 10:00, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
| Quote: | On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:48:21PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Le lun 17 juillet 2006 22:29, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
the discussion (...) was about enabling greylisting on *certain*
*specificaly* *suspicious* hosts. a suspicious
host is:
* either listed on some RBL's (rbl listing "dynamic" blocks are a
good start usually)
* either having no reverse DNS set
* either having curious EHLO lines (that one may catch too much
good mail sadly, so it's to handle with care).
* ...
I apply greylisting on the two first criteriums on a quite used
mail server (around 300.k mails per week, which is not very big,
but should be representative enough).
there is less than 50 mails a week over those that *may* be
legitimate mails that are actually slowed down.
On second thought, I'm very interested in how you measured this false
positive rate. Do all the recipients of the 300k mails per week check
for every mail if it was greylisted (that means you would put a
header or something like that saying "this mail was greylisted"?),
and they _always_ check on _every_ legitimate mail and _always_
report false positives to you? Probably not. So, are these 50 mails a
week all the mail that undergoes greylisting but *still* goes through
(i.e. gets retried, roughly)? Something else?
|
it's the number of mails that are beeing resubmited per week with my
system. so in fact, in them, there is 49 spams.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Wuertele
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:10 am Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
* Lionel Elie Mamane <lmamane@debian.org> [2006-07-17 22:32]:
| Quote: | On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 08:36:31AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
So far and unless I forget someone, I haven't seen much other people
being strongly opposed to greylisting on Debian hosts,
Here is one: I am strongly opposed to greylisting (on mail sent to me
or that I send), for the reason that it delays legitimate mail.
|
Greylisting is among the minor causes for mail delays in my experience.
Most delays when it comes to debian.org mails are caused by the load on
the servers from what I see.
With other companies mails the main delays are caused by their ISPs
smarthosts as they always have queue times of up to 30 minutes while
greylisting only delays once.
yours Martin
--
<maxx@debian.org> ---- Debian GNU/Linux - The Universal Operating System
<yath> lol, mein feuermelder ist dausicher
<yath> im batteriefach unter der batterie steht
<yath> "WARNUNG: BATTERIE ENTFERNT"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pierre HABOUZIT
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:30 am Post subject:
Re: Measuring "should I greylist?" false positive rate [was: greylisting on debian.org?]
|
|
|
Le mar 18 juillet 2006 10:03, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
| Quote: | Le mar 18 juillet 2006 10:00, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:48:21PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Le lun 17 juillet 2006 22:29, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
the discussion (...) was about enabling greylisting on *certain*
*specificaly* *suspicious* hosts. a suspicious
host is:
* either listed on some RBL's (rbl listing "dynamic" blocks are
a good start usually)
* either having no reverse DNS set
* either having curious EHLO lines (that one may catch too much
good mail sadly, so it's to handle with care).
* ...
I apply greylisting on the two first criteriums on a quite used
mail server (around 300.k mails per week, which is not very big,
but should be representative enough).
there is less than 50 mails a week over those that *may* be
legitimate mails that are actually slowed down.
On second thought, I'm very interested in how you measured this
false positive rate. Do all the recipients of the 300k mails per
week check for every mail if it was greylisted (that means you
would put a header or something like that saying "this mail was
greylisted"?), and they _always_ check on _every_ legitimate mail
and _always_ report false positives to you? Probably not. So, are
these 50 mails a week all the mail that undergoes greylisting but
*still* goes through (i.e. gets retried, roughly)? Something else?
it's the number of mails that are beeing resubmited per week with my
system. so in fact, in them, there is 49 spams.
|
oh and as a matter of a fact, I just happen to see that you Cc-ed me on
the exchanges, I just received the first mail you sent. Just see by
yourself how fast and furious master runs:
Received: from master.debian.org (master.debian.org [70.103.162.30])
by mx1.polytechnique.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7512D33176
for <pierre.habouzit@m4x.org>; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:05:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from 5.xs4all.nl ([213.84.114.29] helo=capsaicin.mamane.lu)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1G2k5n-0007ft-48; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 02:34:07 -0500
Yeah, master took 31 minutes to deliver the mail to the next SMTP
server, and I'm an admin on it (that's the mail server I was speaking
of earlier in the thread) and it was its first submission.
so maybe it's time you revise your jugements on how efficient debian.org
mails servers are recently.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lionel Elie Mamane
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 100
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:30 am Post subject:
Re: Measuring "should I greylist?" false positive rate [was: greylisting on debian.org?]
|
|
|
On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 10:03:59AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
| Quote: | Le mar 18 juillet 2006 10:00, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:48:21PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Le lun 17 juillet 2006 22:29, Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
the discussion (...) was about enabling greylisting on *certain*
*specificaly* *suspicious* hosts. a suspicious
host is:
* either listed on some RBL's (rbl listing "dynamic" blocks are a
good start usually)
* either having no reverse DNS set
* either having curious EHLO lines (that one may catch too much
good mail sadly, so it's to handle with care).
* ...
I apply greylisting on the two first criteriums on a quite used
mail server (around 300.k mails per week, which is not very big,
but should be representative enough).
there is less than 50 mails a week over those that *may* be
legitimate mails that are actually slowed down.
On second thought, I'm very interested in how you measured this false
positive rate.
it's the number of mails that are beeing resubmited per week with my
system. so in fact, in them, there is 49 spams.
|
Fascinating. Which RBL's do you use for that? Or do you have atypical
mail patterns? Exactly two of my 50-or-so mail users use greylisting,
based on RBLs *only*. They are kinda high-traffic mail users, but
still, they, on their own, push the greylisting "this triplet is
allowed" database entries to the thousands. The "this triplet tried
once, but not more, in the alloted time" database entries are more
numerous only by about an order of magnitude.
--
Lionel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Christian Perrier
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 22 Mar 2005
Posts: 204
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:30 am Post subject:
Re: greylisting on debian.org?
|
|
|
(afaik, it's very obvious that I'm subscribed to -devel and, unless I'm
wrong, I never requeted for being CC'ed in private)
Lionel Elie Mamane a écrit :
| Quote: | Wrong. Disagreeing with you is not the same as not reading your
arguments. Sorry that you were not convincing.
|
I'm afraid you failed to make it clear. Glad that you cleared this out.
| Quote: | This will still include legitimate mail.
|
Sure...just like legitimate mail is very likely to be slowed...or lost
on DD machines because most of us *have* to use anti-spam measures on
our own machines (most often without the needed complete knowledge, /me
being the first).
Or, even without this, slowing down because our @debian.org addresses
are overspammed and we may be likely to jst miss one important mail.
Or (already happened to me) losing information because a legitimate
mail, lost in a bunch of spam crap, was infortunate enough to just
appear like spam...and be discarded or not read.
There is a price to pay and slowing down (not losing...slowing down) a
very small portion of legitimate mail is a small part of it.
| Quote: | Bingo: Legitimate mail slowed down. You think the price is worth it,
which is a valid opinion. I happen not to think so.
|
The question becomes: aren't you in a small minority? We certainly all
know that it's perfectly impossible to reach a 100% consensus on such a
topic. But what would be your point if a strong majority of DD agrees
with the use of greylisting (as described by Pierre)
| Quote: | I don't remember the "master cannot cope under mail load, we need
desperate measures" point being brought up before. I may have missed
it.
|
Well, given the way I received debian lists mail last day, there has
probably been something somewhere..:)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:19 am | All times are GMT
|
|
Car Loans | Mortgage | Remortgages | Free Advertising | Gas Suppliers
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Unix/Linux blog |
electronics forum |
medicine forum |
science forum |
|
|
Privacy Policy
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
*nix
»
Linux
»
Distributions
»
Debian
»
devel
