Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:41:02 +0100 From: Karl Pielorz <kpielorz@tdx.co.uk> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Eliminating "noise" from secondary MX Message-ID: <770984.1056386462@raptor> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20030623083909.02be3c50@localhost> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20030623083909.02be3c50@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On 23 June 2003 08:48 -0600 Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> wrote: > [snip] > > The secondary mail exchanger tries to send the message on to its > destination, but the mail is bounced by the primary mail host (either as > spam or because it has been sent to an invalid address). So, the > secondary dutifully tries to notify the sender that the message didn't > get through. > > Of course, the "From:" and "Reply-to:" headers of the spam contain either > a completely bogus address or one that has quickly been shut down due to > spamming. So, the host, not knowing what else to do, sends a notice to > Postmaster, saying that the notice to the sender could not be delivered. > > What's the easiest way to suppress this resource-consuming, mailbox > clogging chain reaction? Carefully check out the sendmail "Double Bounce Address" option, with a view to piping it to /dev/null [Like I said, 'carefully' check this out :)] Or, secondly - as was cleverly suggested to me a while ago - setup a 3rd MX that has a IN A PTR to your primary MX, and make it the highest priority... e.g. mx0.mydomain.com PRI 20 mx1.mydomain.com PRI 30 mx2.mydomain.com PRI 40 (Which is really just a different name for mx0) That way, you'll probably find most the spam hits the highest priority MX (which is, in reality your primary MX). -Kp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?770984.1056386462>