On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 10:05:02AM -0800, Fred Viles wrote:
> On 4 Mar 2004 at 9:52, James P. Roberts wrote about
> | Would it make sense to apply a 30 second-ish delay to every incoming
> | connection, simply to weed out the virii? Since any legit MTA should accept
^^^^^ viruses
> | such a delay without incident, and most virii engines would give up.
^^^^^ virus
> No, I think that would be very anti-social behavior. Imagine if
> everyone did it - what would happen to the Internet's email
> infrastructure?
I think you misunderstand the fundamental point of SMTP and unreliable
connections.
I don't believe it to be anti-social behaviour, and believe in causing
deliberate command-response penalties based on host-history and current
behaviour. I am quite happy for others to do the same to hosts that I
run.
The point is that the people it seriously impacts are those hosts who are
sending out large amounts of mail to hosts which implement this kind of
policy, not the average mail.
Next you'll be saying that "greylisting" is anti-social, because it forces
the sending MTA to keep a copy on the queue.
MBM
--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm@???> http://colondot.net/
