[OT] HELP!!! mail attack
Patrick O'Callaghan
pocallaghan at gmail.com
Tue Apr 1 17:48:55 UTC 2008
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 12:52 -0400, max bianco wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan
> <pocallaghan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 20:16 +1030, Tim wrote:
> > Anyone who argues that email shouldn't be a reliable
> mechanism is
> > skirting the issue. It should be. There's no excuse it not
> to be.
>
>
> AFAIK no-one is arguing that it *shouldn't* be (in the sense
> that in
> some ideal alternate universe we wouldn't want it to be), but
> that it
> *isn't*.
>
> And to say "there's no excuse for it not to be" is either a
> misstatement
> of what you mean or evidence of a jaw-dropping
> misunderstanding of how
> the Internet works. As I can't believe you really mean the
> latter, I
> guess it must be the former. Or maybe we have different
> conceptions of
> what "reliable" means.
>
> As I pointed out in an earlier message, there are situations
> in which
> not using greylisting leads to a measurably less reliable mail
> service.
> Not all situations, maybe not your situation, but I know they
> exist
> because I've seen them.
>
>
> I thought email was supposed to be a best effort delivery service. We
> may take that it always or usually always works for granted
> but .......
My point exactly.
poc
More information about the users
mailing list