[anti-spam-wg] Re: greylisting

  • To: RIPE anti-spam WG <
    >
  • From: Brian Nisbet <
    >
  • Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:52:52 +0100

pna.lists wrote:
> Are you sure you understand greylisting well? Even if spammers are
> able to retry the SMTP connection, there is a bigger chance for their
> IP address or a website domain being blaclisted (SURBL...) and/or the
> message fuzzy signature being added to a database like Vipul's
> Razor/Cloudmark.

I believe my short description of greylisting is a fair one, even
given what can happen in the time between the initial attempt and
any followup.  It is, perhaps, over-simplified, but not untrue.

I'm not sure if it was this description you had an issue with or
Rodney's comments (that he has already responded to).

Greylisting seems to be one of the most divisive of the current
AS technologies, but I currently believe the delivery delays and
the chance of losing some mail does not make up for the drop in
spam, in my personal experience.  Of course if yours differs then
I wouldn't for one moment suggest you don't use it.

Regards,

Brian.

-- 
Brian Nisbet,
Senior Network Engineer, HEAnet
Email: brian.nisbet@localhost
Tel: +35316609040/Fax:+35316603666