Re: [SLUG] Virus scanning bounce strategy

[Alexander Samad <alex@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Why not to the check at DATA command yourself ?

A

On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 04:26:45PM +1100, Mary Gardiner wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 01, 2004, David Kempe wrote:
> > I have been steadily disabling secondary MXes for some time now. Its 
> > just a great way to attract spam - not an option when you net connection 
> > is not stable/permanent, but aside from that secondary MX just seems to 
> > be spam trap.
> 
> Yes they are spam traps, however all domains that I'm secondary for
> have had extended downtime combined with recipients who don't want to
> wait three days for their mail, so I'm doing some people a favour and
> being a secondary.
> 
> As far as the original message goes, I'd probably refuse to secondary
> for anyone who did SMTP rejects of spam and viruses -- this will tend to
> mean that the secondary has to queue endless bounce messages because
> most of the spam and an increasing number of viruses go through
> secondaries.
> 
> -Mary
> -- 
> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
> Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html