Dave Lugo
dlugo@etherboy.com
Mon, 1 Apr 2002 18:18:18 -0500 (EST)
On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Tony L. Svanstrom wrote:
>
> What I forgot to write was that I haven't had enough time to really "evaluate
> the nature of DCC" (not sure how to put it), so what I wrote was more thoughts
> than what I considered "facts".
>
> The problem is that if you're trying to apply DCC to a situation where the
> end-user isn't aware of what is being used and why, then the crucial white-
> list part isn't available; and based on the fact that the average user is an
> idiot it can't easily be added (not unless you don't mind long support-sessions
> via e-mail every time a user suspects he's not getting enough e-mails, and
> every time a user isn't getting enough e-mails).
>
I'm faced with a similar situation for my vanity domains. I've worked out
a solution that will work for me, but I don't know how well it would apply
to your environment:
. rejected items are logged to per-recipient dirs
. users can 'browse' the past week or 14 days worth
of rejected items, and add (via html gui), derived
whitelist entries.
. users can also forward items from the 'holding' area
to thier normal mailbox.
. crontab'd purging of old items from the log dir.
The above at least allows users to look for 'missing' DCC-threshhold
reaching items, and add whitelist entries to prevent future similar
items from being blocked.
Hope this helps,
Dave
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Dave Lugo dlugo@etherboy.com LC Unit #260 TINLC
Have you hugged your firewall today? No spam, thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------
Are you the police? . . . . No ma'am, we're sysadmins.