On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, wayne wrote:
False positives can also be very expensive. Reduction in bandwidth
and hardware costs by aggressive and early filtering may be penny wise
and pound foolish. IF the MUA has a good spam filtering system, it
may be most cost effective to let a lot of questionable email through
to it.
Actually, the better solution is to implement per-user filtering on
the mail server. It's a heck of a lot cheaper to upgrade software
on one or a few servers than supply lots of users with new MUA's.
And if a user is dialing up long-distance to pick up e-mail, he/she
will appreciate systems that trap suspect mail on the server for review
rather than forcing it all to be downloaded first.
--
David.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg