On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 04:47:16PM -0500, Marc Alaia asserted:
I think the relevant discussion, which nobody has addressed, is when to
terminate the email and what benefit you would observe. Therefore, to be
direct, in reality approximately what percentage of you overall bandwith
goes to spam? This is bandwith which would be absolutely recoverable by
rejecting a message at the early phase rather than accepting it and then
deleting it.
I thought we were addressing this right now. Do you want a specific number?
Ok, for me its around 25% of overall traffic. Compared to legitimate email,
that number increases substantially to around 45%. It will vary on an almost
seasonal basis. Glancing at my logs, using existing methods such as dnsbl, I
see far more traffic being rejected than accepted. Without these blacklists,
unless I want to add staff to spend all day updating the firewall rules, the
volume of received crap would easily saturate my pipes. But dns blacklists are
subject to denial of service attacks and as a result, the numbers are
diminishing. Of those that remain, they are becoming increasingly a paid for
service that again negatively impacts my budget. I have no problem with their
business model being self-sustaining, but they are not responsive enough to
errors.
SPF is distributed for performance reasons and a soon to be standard that is,
so far, simple to impliment.
Second, why was the question only addressed to ISP's? Are
corporate users no less important?
Well, in theory, you could participate, but you don't know the secret handshake
do you?
--
Bob Greene
Public key available at
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC9C7841C
Or, you can just pull my finger
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡