4.40.5: IPBlock 451 versus 550

[Jeff A. Earickson]

Rakesh,
    Point taken.  I have changed my CustomConfig.pm back to using 451
instead of 550.  I'll see if the problem returns.  Hey, this is
a beta version of MailScanner and those of us who run it should
be willing to test the new features.

Jeff Earickson
Colby College

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Rakesh wrote:

> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:30:35 +0530
> From: Rakesh <rakesh at NETCORE.CO.IN>
> Reply-To: MailScanner mailing list <MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
> To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: Re: 4.40.5: IPBlock 451 versus 550
>
> Jeff A. Earickson wrote:
>
>> Julian,
>>
>> Just curious as to why you changed IPBlock from fatal rejections
>> to tmpfail.  I've had a couple of spammers pounding on my system
>> with crap that would have ordinarily been booted by IPBlock for
>> good.  Now they just keep trying.  I've modified my copy of
>> CustomConfig.pm in 4.40.5 to do the 550 rejections again.
>
>
> my idea of suggesting Jules for 451 error instead of 550 error code was
> that, unknowingly we do not bounce back some geniune mails just because
> the sending server is sending too many mails to us. For e.g. a yahoo's
> outgoing server might be sending quite a good amount of mails to an MX
> server hosting many domains. So if we just temporarily deny from
> accepting the mail then however i am quaranteed that a good outgoing
> server would definitely try again for delivery which won't be applicable
> incase of a 550 rejection and probably some sending out an important
> mail would finally get a bounce back for no good reason. This totally
> different from the greylisting concept in which any server initiating a
> first time connections will have to compulsarily try again later.
>
> However majority spammers use hijacked machines or poor SMTP engines to
> send out spams and asking them to try again later with 451 error code
> wouldnt be of any harm as they don't bother to try again later so the
> spams doesn't come at all. However if they are using someone else's
> server which actually does retry sending the spam, then we can probably
> notify the administrator to checkout his system or atleast have 1 hour
> to block the IP on the firewall.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Rakesh B. Pal
> Emergic CleanMail Team.
> Netcore Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
>
> ========================================================================
> "First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you.
> Then they fight you. Then you win."
>                                               - M. Gandhi
> ========================================================================
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Netcore Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
> Website:  http://www.netcore.co.in
> Spamtraps: http://cleanmail.netcore.co.in/directory.html
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
> To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
> 'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
> Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
> the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).
>
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
>

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!