X-Junk-Score: 0 [] X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 [] Return-Path: Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.142.186] verified) by mail.stalker.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.7) with ESMTP id 47531047 for CGatePro@mail.stalker.com; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:29:05 -0700 Received-SPF: pass receiver=mail.stalker.com; client-ip=209.85.142.186; envelope-from=tamachan3@gmail.com Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id w7so400779tib.13 for ; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:28:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9g7NST/ZpANIyq6cP4V7/LxaMs4NO1r8naEoLkvK2zM=; b=iqPhRm6T16otOeTdCrrLljuqjH77ReqxZbmsC+t/lZcRYQF1Nru5/b7jIxilJHDNiw qds/2Jqb3hCbkzmyuCKfVijrPfhJr3mc5I/eKgbkyk/Rkv7kmRKf0h/gN0iU/1vqtPaf Fwkb95JK5QbaipMkascfvZ9Ajx9mDMOTKYr4s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Nbarm55fYutCVz7DN6Rb8uYmi9Q7A0nYJFxyGNaTKT2iwG3DAV8Ma905CXZVD2Lpu1 9FqrdOBEiRAVhspnXtB/L529od7Walbk0GgQwnD0OPPwW2mVS427/Kir4LVYl1QyD+jG lxUjBwB3KwQEdg3cH//hbMYLcZWIQiFVEViWY= Received: by 10.110.15.9 with SMTP id 9mr15607314tio.44.1220653723486; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:28:43 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from todd.local ( [61.205.60.150]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i6sm1577868tid.16.2008.09.05.15.28.42 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:28:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48C1B298.20201@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 07:28:40 +0900 From: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCJD8kXiRBJGMkcxsoQg==?= User-Agent: Thunderbird/3.0a2 (Macintosh; 2008072822) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: CommuniGate Pro Discussions Subject: Re: greylisting with CGPro References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mark Nipper wrote: > That's incorrect. Even RFC 821 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc821) > states that a client should retry after receiving a 400 level message. > This might be ignored by much older clients of course, but there's > nothing much to be done about substandard implementations. RFC 2821 states that the SMTP client is "encouraged" to try again. > Either way, you always risk losing legitimate mail by greylisting. I totally agree with you. :-) -- たまちゃん / tamachan3@gmail.com