"David F. Skoll" <dfs(_at_)roaringpenguin(_dot_)com> wrote:
Well, Alan, I have no idea what you did to attract that much spam, but
I assure you, it's unusual. None of my clients nor the 500+ people on
the MIMEDefang mailing list have reported anywhere near the spam stats
on striker.ottawa.on.ca
That's why I joined this list, and why I'm making such noise about
the issue. Everyone I talk to complains about the spam "problem", and
they get 3 orders of magnitude less spam than I do.
That's my point. I don't *care* how cheap it is to run any kind of
filtering software. It's still too expensive.
For you, maybe so.
So what are my alternatives? Give up on email? Pay $2k/year to
upgrade my equipment?
All of the proposed solutions which talk about filtering mail are a
waste of time. Does it really make sense to allow terabytes of
garbage to fill the network? Why wouldn't we just solve the problem
by minimizing the garbage traffic, instead of upgrading the network?
People who propose mail filters as a "solution" are implicitely
accepting that wasting network bandwidth and CPU time is OK. My
opinion is that we should minimize the problem, and THEN talk about
filtering. The filters will be cheaper to use, and will probably have
higher accuracy.
Alan DeKok.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg