From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932081AbWFMMYD (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:24:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932082AbWFMMYD (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:24:03 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:43433 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932081AbWFMMYB (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:24:01 -0400 Subject: Re: VGER does gradual SPF activation (FAQ matter) From: David Woodhouse To: Matthias Andree Cc: Horst von Brand , jdow , Jesper Juhl , nick@linicks.net, Bernd Petrovitsch , marty fouts , Matti Aarnio , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060613104557.GA13597@merlin.emma.line.org> References: <200606130300.k5D302rc004233@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> <1150189506.11159.93.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20060613104557.GA13597@merlin.emma.line.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:24:34 +0100 Message-Id: <1150201475.12423.12.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 (2.6.1-1.fc5.2.dwmw2.1) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 12:45 +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: > > It's fairly trivial with a decent MTA. I use all kinds of conditions to > > trigger greylisting -- HTML mail, 'Re:' in subject with no References:, > > lack of reverse DNS or CSA on the sending host, >=0.1 SA points, etc. > > Adding "is not subscribed to the mailing list they're trying to post to" > > should be trivial. > > Given that list drivers are separate from the MTA (and that's good), I'm unconvinced of the goodness of that. With a suitably capable MTA, there isn't a huge reason not to have the basic receive-and-resend mail path handled _entirely_ by the MTA, rather than pawning it off to separate software. Obviously the interface to subscribers, be it through email or http, wants to be separate -- but receiving and sending email is what an MTA does best. And I've learned to hate mailman with a vengeance -- I've been meaning to investigate exilist for some time now, for my mailing lists. http://duncanthrax.net/exilist-distro/ > it's less trivial than simple looking at message headers or DNS info > that the MTA shuffles around anyways. The MTA doesn't need the > subscription list however, since "exploding" the subscriber list is a > separate problem handled by Majordomo, Mailman, Sympa, whatever. Even if you have a cron job which extracts the subscriber list into a text file or other database which is used by the MTA, it isn't particularly hard. In many cases, Exim should probably be able to read the subscriber database directly, anyway. Actually, just tagging _all_ posts to the list for greylisting is probably OK as long as you're doing your greylisting sensibly. The thing about greylisting is that you're checking to see if it's a dump-and-run spammer, or whether it's a real mail host with a queue. Once a given host is observed to actually retry and get past the greylisting, there's little point in _ever_ greylisting mail from that host again anyway. If you get that right, it doesn't matter if you tag every incoming mail to the list for greylisting; it doesn't keep causing delays to people who've got mail through before. -- dwmw2