Re: s/qmail vs qmail with John Simpson's combined patch

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Hello Andy,

Saturday, February 9, 2019, 4:04:02 PM, you wrote:

AB> Speaking of greetdelay, from my statistics  it still seems like a fairly
AB> effective method as 17.9% of all connections in my environment hit it. I
AB> use two delays,  a 10 second and  a 30 second, however, I'm  not able to
AB> easily distinguish which is more effective without additional work.

AB> Of those  that hit a  greet delay problem, 8.3%  disconnect prematurely,
AB> and  91.6% are  dropped because  they sent  data before  the banner  was
AB> presented.

Are you implementing that with s/qmail?

- --
Best regards,
 Niamh                            mailto:[email protected]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iEYEARECAAYFAlxf5TwACgkQjFUB2JvnEPn0oACg+eA9LLGomvMDY7WulkYKHL21
UU0AoOKOrNpMGXbE9uhGxlVQFeNI/FzI
=u1Q5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----