From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 27 15:23:15 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A9EC16A400 for ; Sat, 27 Jan 2007 15:23:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from simon@zaphod.nitro.dk) Received: from mx.nitro.dk (zarniwoop.nitro.dk [83.92.207.38]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14BCD13C49D for ; Sat, 27 Jan 2007 15:23:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from simon@zaphod.nitro.dk) Received: from zaphod.nitro.dk (unknown [192.168.3.39]) by mx.nitro.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3287E2D48AA; Sat, 27 Jan 2007 15:22:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by zaphod.nitro.dk (Postfix, from userid 3000) id 5B5321141D; Sat, 27 Jan 2007 16:23:13 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 16:23:13 +0100 From: "Simon L. Nielsen" To: JoaoBR Message-ID: <20070127152312.GB1085@zaphod.nitro.dk> References: <8a20e5000701240903q35b89e14k1ab977df62411784@mail.gmail.com> <20070127141052.GA96039@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <45BB6296.1080106@pingle.org> <200701271304.29216.joao@matik.com.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200701271304.29216.joao@matik.com.br> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Cc: rsmith@xs4all.nl, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Loosing spam fight -> devnull@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: devnull@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 15:23:15 -0000 On 2007.01.27 13:04:28 -0200, JoaoBR wrote: > On Saturday 27 January 2007 12:32, Jim Pingle wrote: > > Roland Smith wrote: > > > Most spammers do not bother to return if they get a resend request. > > > That's the whole point of doing this. So practically it doesn't increase > > > bandwidth consumption. > > > ... > > Greylisting is a decent idea, but it seems to me that it's just another > > tool in the ongoing arms race against spammers. It may work for a while, > > but eventually they'll catch on and it will only cause unnecessary delays > > for legitimate mail. > > finally some cares about the users here, that is a really important point, how > do you justify that your client get the email he is waiting for an hour > later? Probably he looks then for a better service provider ... Could this discussion please be continued on the apropriate list which is designed for spam - devnull@FreeBSD.org? Thanks. -- Simon L. Nielsen