Qmail
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx [X200611276990

To: "Uncle George" <netbeans@gatworks.com>
Subject: RE: Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx [X200611276990]
From: "Maintenance Fees Inquiries" <MaintenanceFeesInquiries@USPTO.GOV>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:07:47 -0500
Cc: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: gmail-qmail@securepoint.com
Delivered-to: sp.com.list@gmail.com
Delivered-to: mailing list qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Mailing-list: contact qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm
Thread-index: AccSX7TbuwjHfddpS22Su/y8l8XMgQ==
Thread-topic: Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx [X200611276990]
Dear Uncle George,                                                              
                                             Thank you for contacting the 
Maintenance Fee Branch.  You should receive a response within 2-3 business 
days.  The tracking number for your inquiry is X200611276990.                   
                                                                                
                                                       Maintenance Fee Branch 
(571) 272-6500



-----Original Message-----
From: Uncle George [mailto:netbeans@gatworks.com]
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 3:07 PM
To: Jason Frisvold
Cc: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Subject: Re: Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx

Jason Frisvold wrote:

> On 11/27/06, Marc Perkel <marc@perkel.com> wrote:
>
>>  No - on my system a 4xx error only means that that particular server 
>> isn't
>> ready. It means try the other servers or come back later. It 
>> certianly dos
>> not mean that all the servers aren't ready. That's what I use EXIM 
>> and not
>> Qmail. All other MTAs except Qmail behave this way. it's what the 
>> spec says.
>> Qmail does it wrong.
>
>
> Hrm..  I find this interesting and slightly disturbing.  Can you
> please provide the spec and highlight the passage which identifies
> this behavior as correct?
>
> I'm not sure I like the idea of a mail server immediately trying
> another MX if the initial one it contacted was busy.  This just
> creates additional load on the other MXs and can cause additional
> meltdown.  I believe the "correct" way for this to work is to queue
> the message when a 4XX is received and retry later.  When later
> arrives, the MX lookup is repeated and at that point it's possible
> that an alternative server is chosen.
>
I thought this was relevant, and should have answered your question:

> as per section  5 of RFC 2821  circa 2001: Address Resolution and Mail 
> Handling
>
>     To provide reliable
>   mail transmission, the SMTP client MUST be able to try (and retry)
>   each of the relevant addresses in this list in order, until a
>   delivery attempt succeeds.  However, there MAY also be a configurable
>   limit on the number of alternate addresses that can be tried.  In any
>   case, the SMTP client SHOULD try at least two addresses. 





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • RE: Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx [X200611276990], Maintenance Fees Inquiries <=