From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun May 4 11:45:42 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA09863 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 4 May 1997 11:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA09858 for ; Sun, 4 May 1997 11:45:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id LAA14360; Sun, 4 May 1997 11:43:28 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199705041843.LAA14360@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Sendmail.cf patch #2.. To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 11:43:28 -0700 (MST) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <19970504192506.HW37541@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at May 4, 97 07:25:06 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > Thing is, spam-rejection is a nice bandwidth-saver.. and there are a lot > > of places where bandwidth is expensive (eg Australia). Blocking it before > > the mail is sent would save a lot of money, ... > > But it totally fails if your MXes don't want to block the same list as > you do. Yes. You need to have a reject from the MX forwarding to you sent to the rejected machine instead of showing up as an error in the MX machines postmater's mailbox. There needs to be a "meta" mechanism for you to provide the "reject mail from these spammers when accepting mail on my behalf" to the MX host, and have it enforce it for you. You'd provide this at the same time you did the reject, since your rejection of mail from an MX host has to be different that your reject of mail from a spam host anyway... you need a different "rejection service class". Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.