1 |
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 01:05:14AM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
2 |
> $SUBJECT says it all... what do you think? |
3 |
TL;DR: don't engage in this arms race, the only losers are those that |
4 |
play by the rules. |
5 |
|
6 |
As kentnl, there are valid use cases for lots of emails: |
7 |
- patchsets |
8 |
- related-issues specifically split to one issue per thread, with |
9 |
multiple parallel threads. |
10 |
- busy days of mail |
11 |
|
12 |
It also raises a concern that mail delivered out of order can cause |
13 |
severe confusion on mailing lists. Eg, I write 5 emails on a thread in |
14 |
-dev. The first 3 get through immediately, but the latter ones are |
15 |
delayed by the greater value of (greylist time && next-mailserver |
16 |
attempt). If it happens to attempt messages 4,5, in order, but the |
17 |
greylist time expires between #4 & #5, then #5 will be accepted, but #3 |
18 |
and #4 will not yet be accepted (until much later on if the counter |
19 |
makes you wait even longer). |
20 |
|
21 |
To forestall further questions: |
22 |
- no, tracking if a mail is on a specific thread and then adding the |
23 |
thread as one of the greylisting keys is non-trivial, and can be |
24 |
worked around by suitably motivated persons. |
25 |
- Suitable motivated persons can also bypass your per-sender |
26 |
restrictions by just rotating their senders, and thus putting anybody |
27 |
else at a disadvantage if they don't also do the same. |
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
31 |
Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Trustee & Treasurer |
32 |
E-Mail : robbat2@g.o |
33 |
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 |
34 |
GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136 |