Slightly OT: Greylisting success or failure stories?

[Scot L. Harris]

On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 20:34, Jeff Kinz wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 02:49:12PM -0600, David Hoffman wrote:
> > I looked for any discussion lists about greylisting and haven't found
> > any, so I thought I might try asking here.
> > 
> > I'm considering adding greylisting to my postfix configuration, and
> > some of the articles I have been reading about greylisting show that
> > there can be any of several situations in which greylisting would not
> > be a viable solution.
> >
> 
> It is inadvisable for anyone using email in a professional capacity 
> to use any form of TMDA (whitelisting/greylisting).

Interesting rant.  And I agree with most of what you state about TMDA. 
I refuse to respond to such requests.

However don't lump greylisting in with TMDA.  

It is a much different method that does not require senders to jump
through hoops or incur significant resources on the senders part.  It is
essentially transparent to the sender and utilizes standard RFC rules
that have been in place for many many years.

The only real reason someone would not like greylisting is a false
assumption that email is an instant messaging service.  True, when it
works well email can be very very fast.  But the RFC does not guarantee
delivery in any specific amount of time.  Those users who have this
perception will at some point have an email get stuck in a server some
where for several hours or even days.  And that is the result of normal
email operations per the RFCs.  


-- 
Scot L. Harris
webid at cfl.rr.com

Mundus vult decipi decipiatur ergo.
		-- Xaviera Hollander
	[The world wants to be cheated, so cheat.]