In message <46939896.20007@???>, Marc Perkel <marc@???>
writes
>What I also want to do is have several fake higher IPs that always
>return defer but count as penalty events wiping out the good karma data
>and making the IP start over.
So whenever there is a route flap you penalise everyone... ah well, it's
your email, your decisions :(
>Good email will always try twice.
Except when it doesn't, but not worth labouring that again.
>Spambots don't.
I now regularly see spambots showing up in logs with two connection
attempts a little while apart -- I expect they figure that the worst
that can happen is that two emails get delivered :) and it means that
they don't need to save "state"
>So it passes 100% of
>your good email and kills 90% of your spam.
Do you actually have data for this "100%" (or for that matter for the
90%) or are you just guessing that this is what it would be? I ask as
someone who actually publishes data about email
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/forwarding.pdf
paper will be presented at CEAS, early next month
http://www.ceas.cc/
and would like to see more people publish real data with clear and
detailed methodology explanations, so that we see what is really going
on and how it is changing over time.
- --
richard Richard Clayton
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
