[Top] [All Lists]

Re: per user post-data rejects, Processing after the end of DATA

2010-08-14 09:05:23

Ray Bellis wrote:

That's certainly true, although uncommon in my own experience because providers make operational choices to avoid it. As much as possible, the ability to enable or disable a service is kept at the same (or higher) granularity than the MX names.

Yes, that would have been nice.

Unfortunately, where we had this (at a previous job) we had some customers on the generic "customer of this ISP" domain that were paying for AV, and some that weren't.

Simply giving them all the service wasn't possible, as the AV engine was licensed on a per-user basis.

We also had to operate on the basis that AV and anti-spam services
could only be provided by explicit consent, since doing otherwise could fall foul of our equivalent of "common carrier".

We are at a point where an ISP or rather a MSP (Mail Service Provider) not having AV software installed could be considered as a liability. I recall reading (a BNA Legal and Business newsletters) about a proposed Canadian bill that would make it a requirement otherwise fines and shutdowns can be imposed in return ISP liabilities will be reduced. I have not followed up to tell you if it was passed or not.

I think there is a difference in the V and S in AVS. AV is something that can system wide. AS is more subjective.


Hector Santos

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>