RE: [exim] Greylisting

> Hello Carl,

Hi Christian,

> > When I introduced greylisting here it cut the spam down by 97%.
> > Unfortunately I have a number of users who started complaining about
the
> > delay and that killed the project.
>
> It's not just that there may be a delay in mail delivery - greylisting
> on the one hand side needs the "corresponding" ressources to queue
> "good" (i.e. non-spam) messages on _each_ other hand side...

RFC2821 states "while mail that cannot be transmitted immediately MUST
be queued and periodically retried by the sender."

That "MUST" means that regardless of my use of greylisting or not, the
sender *has* to provide resources on the assumption that I won't be able
to accept the messages.

> That's what you should keep in mind...

I'm going to assume that this isn't meant as bluntly and agressively as
it comes across to me (I haven't had my morning coffee yet, so my "tone"
reader might be miscalibrated).

Carl
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
they are addressed.

If you have received this email in error please notify the
originator of the message. This footer also confirms that this
email message has been scanned for the presence of computer viruses.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority,
states them to be the views of Total Recruitment Group.

Scanning of this message and addition of this footer is performed
by SurfControl SuperScout Email Filter software in conjunction with
virus detection software.