Re: [exim] Using DEFER instead of DENY or DROP for spam

That actually is true - but I wanted to see how many times n the log
that someone attempted to send email to the highest MX record. It looks
like I'm getting about 15000 attempts a day. And - the processing is
minimal. A dead address would technically be better in that it would
waste the senders time.

Nikademus wrote:

>Yes, I saw you used this kind of trick. It seems very interesting.
>
>However, I wonder if it's really useful to answer with a defer to the incoming spambot. I mean, you could also put an ip address as an higher MX knowing that this address doesn't listen on port 25, that should also work and consume less resources. And this would also work for people being limited to only one IP for their mail server. What do you think?
>
>On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 06:19:08 -0800
>Marc Perkel <marc@???> wrote:
>
>
>
>>One of the tricks I use and it works really well is that my highest MX
>>record points to an IP address that return DEFER on ALL messages. Real
>>email will retry on the lower MX records. Makes a lot of spam go away
>>and reduced system load by a lot not having to run these messages
>>through spam assassin.
>>
>>
>
>
>