[Mimedefang] Re: On pinheaded ISP's (sort of OT)

[Les Mikesell]

WBrown at e1b.org wrote:
> Les wrote on 01/31/2007 03:52:58 PM:
> 
>> Is 'your' queue better than everyone else's?  Why not do a 4xx tmpfail 
>> if your address check temporarily fails?  Any real MTA should be 
>> prepared to queue and retry.
> 
> Why bother even having a backup MX if all it will do is return a 4xx?  Why 
> not let the sending server just fail to connect you your server and it 
> will retry just as long before failing.

You might want a backup MX or multiples that can run concurrently in 
case one of them has problems and the other(s) can provide equivalent 
relay service.  However, this situation involves the primary delivery 
server or the authentication mechanism used to test for valid users. 
You can't deliver in any case.  What's the point of accepting it then? 
My point of view may be skewed by getting about 50,000 dictionary attack 
  attempts daily for the last few years, but accepting mail without 
knowing the address is valid is not healthy.  You are just asking to 
overwhelm your own outbound queue with NDN's.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    les at futuresource.com