Re: Barracuda Networks Spam Firewall

[Todd Vierling <tv () duh org>]

On Tue, 18 May 2004 Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

: >     Quite frankly, I'm at a loss as to why anyone would wish to accept
: > and queue mail that they cannot deliver.

: Well.. you're somewhat right - *IF* the mail gateway is able to make the
: determination quickly and definitively,

That "if" is rapidly becoming a *requirement*.  I invite you to participate
in SPAM-L () PEACH EASE LSOFT COM is you somehow feel differently.

: Traditionally, "accept and queue" was a reasonable way for a gateway
: mail relay to function (and if you think about it, it's usually the ONLY way
: for an off-site secondary MX to function).

Then make the offsite MX use a user list, or else don't use an offsite MX at
all.  Sending mail exchangers will retry when the recipient servers are
down; that's mandated by SMTP.  You don't need an offsite secondary MX that
has no access to a valid address list.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but as of this year, where the levels of virus
bounce spam as hreached obscene levels, this is no longer a valid excuse.

: For high-volume sites, there are also firewall state issues

Then upgrade your firewall.  This is certainly not a valid excuse.

-- 
-- Todd Vierling <tv () duh org> <tv () pobox com>