Overall, greylisting is a good choice for blocking SPAM emails, but a fair number of spamming software packages are already smart enough to retry delivery to other MX hosts for a domain if delivery through one MX fails. Since presumably all MX hosts will be whitelisted for each other the spammers can deliver to one of the MX's without a delay, and then there is no protection offered by greylisting.
The main advantage for endusers is that greylisting requires no additional configuration at their end. If the server utilizing greylisting is configured appropriately, the end user will only notice a delay on the first message from a given sender.
From a mail administrator's point of view the benefit is twofold. Greylisting takes minimal configuration to get up and running with occasional modifications of any local whitelists. The second benefit is that rejecting email with a temporary error is very cheap in system resources. Most spam filtering tools are very intensive users of CPU and memory. By stopping spam before it hits filtering processes or spool, far fewer system resources are used. This allows more layers of spam filtering or higher throughput.
On the other hand, some mail servers, upon encountering the temporary failure message from a greylisting server on the first attempt, will send a warning message back to the original sender of the message. The warning message is not a bounce message, but it is often formatted similarly to and reads like one. This practice often causes the sender to believe that the message has not been delivered, when in fact the message will be delivered successfully at a later time resulting in to "out-of-curiosity" tickets at the support desk. |