On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 19:38, Radu Hociung wrote:
Andy Bakun wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 18:01 -0500, Radu Hociung wrote:
However, I suspect that some of the higher volume MTAs, like Hotmail or
yahoo, cannot afford delays like that. But that is only a suspicion.
mmh.. it could go either way. If the delays keep spam out and lessen
the cleanup within the network caused by zombies, it may be a bigger win
to throw more SMTP servers in the mix so enforcing the delays don't
decrease overall throughput.
Sure, but then we're back to my theory that DNS (and/or SMTP)
infrastructure would have to double as a result of publishing and
checking records.
Thanks for the confirmation :)
Uh, this confirms nothing related to publishing or checking SPF
records. The delays talked about where the delays purposely introduced
to see if the client is actually reading the data sent by the server,
rather than just injecting SMTP commands into the connection and
ignoring the responses, using that as a sign the client is a zombie
rather than a real MTA.
--
Andy Bakun <spf(_at_)leave-it-to-grace(_dot_)com>