[Mimedefang] Powerful anti-spam rule that never discards vali d e-mail

[local.mimedefang]

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 15:50:18 -0000, dfs at roaringpenguin.com ("David F.
Skoll") wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Mycrom wrote:
>
>> This all is a good idea but you guys need to change the thinking a
little.
>> Issuing a 4XX to all messages will cause the message to be delayed in
most
>> cases. The remote mta will take it and stick it into its little pocket
until
>> next queue run.
>
>No; if there are multiple MX records, the MTA should immediately try the
>next MX record down.

That did not seem to happen. I was seeing delays of up to an hour for 
genuine mails. As someone else has posted, that would not be deemed
acceptable. Maybe in a couple of years when the proportion of spam
exceeds 80% they might think again.