Marc Perkel wrote:
>>>
>>> The idea here is I return a temp error 1 in 5 times. Not enough to
>>> block them. But enough to maybe get people's attention when they look
>>> at their logs. Hopefully someone will notice it and fix it.
>>>
>>> I recommend that everyone do this and if they did it would improve
>>> things in general.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> If you do at least a host -v, dig, or whois on a sampling of those
>> arrivals, you will probably find yourself trying to modify the
>> behaviour of zombified WinBoxen on dynamic IP.
>>
>> Hardly likely to 'improve things in general' - unless you own stock in
>> the local power grid.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>
> Yes - I have it at the end of a lot of other tests so it's not doing it
> to zombie bots.
>
Well then you might consider the *other* thing you have overlooked:
No one, human, animal, or computer - will pay much attention to a log entry that
may not even appear, or at least not with the details you sent - for a delivery
attempt that *eventually* gets through.
'Defer' won't cut that, and even 'drop/deny' may be ignored.
If you intend to put something 'in your face' for that remote sysadmin, then you
will want to use:
accept
control = fakereject/<message>
So that the *senders* harass their sysadmin to fix the problem.
Otherwise, that individual owes you Jack Squat, will do SQRT-Future Activities
about his PTR, but *will* show up on this list wingeing about how rude we are to
actually enforce RFC 822 and subsequent in the face of his budget limitations...
Bill
