Re: fake MX records

From: Marc Perkel <marc(at)perkel.com>
Date: Wed Aug 15 2007 - 11:48:03 EDT

Aaron Wolfe wrote:

> On 8/14/07, Michael Scheidell  wrote:
>   
>>     

>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ram [mailto:ram@netcore.co.in]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 6:07 AM
>>> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>>> Subject: fake MX records
>>>
>>>
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks this page mentions
>>> setting up fake MXes
>>>
>>> Is this method relevant today too with a lot of spam being
>>> relayed through proper smtp channels
>>>
>>> The page says the primary MX should not be accepting
>>> connections at all. Has anyone else tried this , will this
>>> cause delay in my mail
>>>

>> Yes, and some systems might not ever send you email (they violate RFC's)
>>     
>
> This is the biggest problem with "fake" MX records for me.  If your
> primary MX is not available, you will simply lose mail from some
> senders.  It's entirely their "fault" for violating the RFCs but the
> mail is still lost, and it isn't easy to explain whats going on to
> your users/customers.  Greylisting gives me about the same effect but
> it works with a bigger percentage of borken servers and I can easily
> exclude broken mailservers if needed.
>
> -Aaron
>
>   

I'm doing it and I'm not losing email from any senders. Received on Wed Aug 15 11:49:28 2007