On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> Philip, would it be difficult to implent config options of, say:
> relay_reject_slow
> host_reject_slow
Remember that while you are sitting there dribbling out stuff slowly,
you are tieing up *your* resources as well. You are keeping an SMTP
connection open, thus reducing the number available for everyone else
(if you have a limit set), and you have a process running which is
taking up real and virtual memory and other process resources.
Exim sends its SMTP responses in single write() calls. I would not want
to do otherwise. It would be silly to send them out one character at a
time. Besides, they are typically not very many characters long.
> Would this be reasonable? Practical? Is there even consensus that this
> might be a Good Thing? My instinct suggests that a combination of the RBL
> facility and slow-rejection may be the best anti-spam measure available,
> short of state (attempts to impose) regulation.
So while it might be practical, I do not myself think it is reasonable
or a Good Thing.
--
Philip Hazel University Computing Service,
ph10@??? New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG,
P.Hazel@??? England. Phone: +44 1223 334714
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
