On 26 September 2007, Liviu Daia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 September 2007, Luca Corti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 17:02 +0300, Liviu Daia wrote:
> > > > Another delivery attempt would be needed after this time to pass
> > > > spamd.
> > > Moral: randomize the greylisting time...
> >
> > Between which min/max valuse? Keep in mind that this corresponds to
> > the (minimum) delay introduced in delivering a good messages to the
> > mailbox.
>
> That's up to you. The minimum should be large enough to keep away
> "naive" bots, as it does now. The maximum should be as large as you
> can afford without being too anti-social. :) Some crap will still pass
> through anyway.
The maximum should also leave plenty of time before expiry. Some
mailers use queue backoff algorithms, which means some legitimate
messages might never get a chance to pass if the window is too small...
Regards,
Liviu Daia
--
Dr. Liviu Daia http://www.imar.ro/~daia
