From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GIE88-0005Mj-6o for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:40:32 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k7U0cWUh025329; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:38:32 GMT Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.191]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7U0aUsw024784 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:36:30 GMT Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id x30so19155nfb for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 17:36:30 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=EaxYUJfT/k4IFmj+BlGq8SnfV62S67GHf5ig6VjxY9hySHD4PN8TYSZm5Drnl4WGF83rzZ31a1xNdUaZQ3CgRIy5VZpEqlIcferqwGdQ+3nXVf96SN2hgiT5HkLIgTDvxrO3qA0SOLHc/qovp/W+E2Z9snJI4MhHOdtu//Ak+v8= Received: by 10.49.41.18 with SMTP id t18mr1939746nfj; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 17:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.48.241.1 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 17:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <49bf44f10608291736y7f936e2eg1e135a208d300d37@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 17:36:30 -0700 From: Grant To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Greylisting idea In-Reply-To: <44F4D332.6020205@badapple.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <49bf44f10608281730t12096595uff2cc73fde8e67ea@mail.gmail.com> <44F46F81.3050308@badapple.net> <49bf44f10608291634o4ce0b947i6355278dc344faad@mail.gmail.com> <44F4D332.6020205@badapple.net> X-Archives-Salt: 1c82a100-3c50-45e6-b0b1-f9ce0d8a09f9 X-Archives-Hash: f471951cf2aac65a9fcf8431017d91fd > > How exactly are legitimate messages lost through greylisting? I've > > come up with these: > > > > 1. legitimate messages that don't retry (someone mentioned Amazon > > newsletters) > > The postgrey whitelist included in the build covers some of the major > ones. I'd question these being legitimate emails and I'd question this > being a legitimate way to run your mail system, but this is where you'd > likely see mail lost. Nice. I didn't know postgrey had a default whitelist. > > 2. legitimate messages that take longer than the maximum specified > > retry period to retry (has anyone run into a mail server that takes > > longer than a day to retry?) > > No. Most I've seen is 12 hours at a small DSL provider in LA. The > fastest is Hotmail at 30 seconds. Good news. > > 3. legitimate messages that retry from a different server each time > > they retry (someone mentioned that they have seen this) > > I've seen Dreamhost do this and I still can't fathom the idea behind it. > unless webserver outgoing connections are originating from a NAT DHCP > pool or something weird. However setting the IP check to be the first 24 > bits, aka match on the class C, makes this go away in every case I'm > aware of. Any drawbacks to that? Is this what you mean: # --lookup-by-subnet strip the last 8 bits from IP addresses (default) or this: # --lookup-by-host do not strip the last 8 bits from IP addresses or something else? > In cases 2 and 3 the original mail sender would get their email returned > after the standard four day timeout whereas the mail goes completely > into the ether in case 1. Why wouldn't the email be returned to the sender in case 1? By the way, I've been greylisting for about 24 hours and spam has been reduced by about 99.5%. - Grant -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list