Yakov wrote:
You still have not answered the question - how do you know there are no
false positives? > What method did you use to figure that out?
Sure I have. I said I have analyzing the logs. I have been doing random
double checks where it might seen questionable.
And also, what is your definition of a "false positive"?
As a mail transport/gateway designer, I am basing the design on technical
comformity. Hence, a false positiive is restricting what is otherwise a
legit client connecting into the system to deliver mail.
The WCSAP tuning process will be on going learning the behavior early day,
adding new administrative features, little bit of AI into it, etc, etc, etc.
Also, it isn't that hard. If there was a REAL legit system or message not
getting here, we hear about it soon enough.
You should concentrate your efforts on technical conformity of the specs.
No solution will solve the spammer problem 100% and you will be beating a
dead horse trying to look for one. In my view, your only option is to make
conformity in the future SMTP functional specification a requirement with
server-implementation backward compatibility. That has nothing to do with
DNS, Mail Filters, SPAM vs NO SPAM, BULK vs NON-BULK, non-server vs server
based MTA clients, etc.
---
Hector Santos, CTO
WINSERVER "Wildcat! Interactive Net Server"
support: http://www.winserver.com
sales: http://www.santronics.com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg