[Greylist-users] some comments on spamd

Scot L. Harris webid at cfl.rr.com
Tue May 31 11:30:36 PDT 2005

On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 13:37, Ronald Oussoren wrote:

> Do you, or anyone else, have any indication on the amount of false
> positives with greylisting? I've disabled greylisting on a site because
> several people complained that their mail didn't get through. It seems
> that some mailers are confused by a 4xx result at an unexpected location
> and drop that e-mail.

Have not seen any indication of false positives.  The site I implemented
greylisting for uses a known list for those companies that use email
farms to keep that from being a problem.  

> That is of course a bug in the sending MTA, but I find disappearing
> e-mail highly disconcerning even if it is only a very, very tiny  
> fraction
> of all e-mail.

I agree, legitimate email should not be dropped.  

It would be informative to identify the particular MTAs you are seeing
problems with.  

> If it weren't for those disappearing e-mail I'd never disable  
> greylisting,
> we also got a 90+% decrease in the amount of incoming spam and e-mail
> virusses.

I saw a better than 98% reduction in spam due to greylisting.  Ran stats
on that for awhile to see just how much impact it had.  I did not expect
such a reduction would be possible.  But am happy to be using it.  :)

Scot L. Harris
webid at cfl.rr.com

What is food to one, is to others bitter poison.
		-- Titus Lucretius Carus 

More information about the Greylist-users mailing list