Brian Stempin on 18 Oct 2007 03:51:12 -0000 |
<cross posting seems appropriate here> a pretty serious issue? really? half-joking, are your internets Yeah, I'll ignore it when it subsides. In today's environment, most companies that run email servers either have to (a) buy more or larger mail servers, (b) install some sort of spam appliance (sonicwall, dedicated SpamAssassin box, etc), or (c) both -- all just to keep up with spam! More bandwidth does not solve these issues. Granting more bandwidth to mail servers does not reduce the computational cost of processing and delivering all of that mail. Furthermore, spam filters are often times cheaper than a server, easier to administer, and they can filter spam for multiple servers or even an entire cluster. Guess which route most travel? In regards to the part where you state that the rest of the world prefers to deal with spam by ignoring it: so does the US. They're called spam filters and blacklists, and they can be found at many ISPs and private email servers the US and world 'round. In fact, some people are even willing to pay to have this done for them. I don't know why it is that you so fervently advocate that bandwidth will solve the issue at hand, but I can say this: You seem to have taken nothing into account except for bandwidth. ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|