[OT] HELP!!! mail attack

[max bianco]

On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 20:16 +1030, Tim wrote:
> > Anyone who argues that email shouldn't be a reliable mechanism is
> > skirting the issue.  It should be.  There's no excuse it not to be.
>
> AFAIK no-one is arguing that it *shouldn't* be (in the sense that in
> some ideal alternate universe we wouldn't want it to be), but that it
> *isn't*.
>
> And to say "there's no excuse for it not to be" is either a misstatement
> of what you mean or evidence of a jaw-dropping misunderstanding of how
> the Internet works. As I can't believe you really mean the latter, I
> guess it must be the former. Or maybe we have different conceptions of
> what "reliable" means.
>
> As I pointed out in an earlier message, there are situations in which
> not using greylisting leads to a measurably less reliable mail service.
> Not all situations, maybe not your situation, but I know they exist
> because I've seen them.
>
>
I thought email  was supposed to be a best effort delivery service. We may
take that it always or usually always works for granted but .......

Max
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20080401/472653a4/attachment-0001.htm>