Qmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Christmas Gift for free] 50% Spam reduction !

To: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Subject: Re: [Christmas Gift for free] 50% Spam reduction !
From: "Matthew R. Dempsky" <mrd@alkemio.org>
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 00:01:43 -0600
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
In-reply-to: <200701060022.25904.qmail@honorablemenschen.com>
Mail-followup-to: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Mailing-list: contact qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm
References: <3.0.6.32.20061222190856.00b84580@192.168.192.1> <459E9C6B.50109@scriptkitchen.com> <20070106015856.GA16830@odin.dempsky.org> <200701060022.25904.qmail@honorablemenschen.com>
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 12:22:25AM -0500, Joshua Megerman wrote:
> Here's a 1-line patch to your program that spits out a 554 response code 
> before exiting if strict checking is enabled - this is required to maintain 
> RFC2821 compliance.  Since you are accepting the connection, you must give a 
> response, even if it's just "go away"...

I had considered this and have had others suggest the same.  The only
thing I don't like about it, however, is my understanding is that most
SMTP clients (vanilla qmail-remote is an exception that comes to mind)
treat a 554 error at connection as a permanent rejection, and there
aren't any 4xx codes that RFC 2821 allows at connection.

One other thought I had was to just set the RBLSMTPD environment
variable, and require the user to chain rblsmtpd after greetdelay.

Any thoughts?

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>