Right, if you could set up filers per domain, and delegate administration of those filters to the business being hosted, that'd be ideal. Unilaterally imposing filtering criteria (much as an RBL does) would generally be sub-optimal.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin@;natco-inc.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:49 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > > Very true..We have hosted exchange for business and we get the sh-t > spammed > out of us. But we do not block any email! That may change as our customers > are complaining bitterly. The best solution we would like is a filter on > the > client side and not the server side. MacAfee spam kill product looks nice > but I do not know if it can talk to Exchange server. (not POP) I just felt > we started something ugly on this list!!:) Wanted to clarify why we were > interested. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff@;messageone.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:35 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > And in general, the business needs of a firm providing free web based > e-mail, vs. the business needs of a Fortune 500 company are a tad > different. > So are the usage patterns and a host of other factors. My only comment > about > RBLs as it related to your question (not being defensive, just reiterating > for those who might have lost track) was that I hoped Microsoft would not > integrate RBL functionality directly into the Exchange product because I > felt that such solutions were best left to 3rd party vendors... and then > proceeded to mention a couple of reasons why I thought this to be true. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin@;natco-inc.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:36 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > I originally questioned about RBL's for exchange because we host a > > large .com whose main stay of business is free web based email. They > > have 100k plus users and get spammed to death. We have content > > filtering tools, we can blacklist known spammers, and we can even shut > > down ip's at the router. They still get spammed to death hurting their > > service. Customers complain. The owner of this .com asked us to use > > spamcop. Since enlisting spam cop 100's of thousands emails are now > > refused a day!! All of > > the users were notified of the use of spamcop and were told to report > any > > emails that should have gotten thru. It has been 3 months now and one > > reported email that should have gotten thru did not. Our customer is > > happy, > > his users are happy and we spend a lot less time tracking spammers. Our > > servers are happy, our sans are happy, I'm happy. Oh our bandwidth is > > happy > > also!! > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:esojka@;NBME.org] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:50 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > "You following remark ... Seems to say" ? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: William Lefkovics [mailto:william@;techsanctuary.org] > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:26 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > > "depsite it's poor grammar" ? > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:bounce-exchange-104116@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Walsh, Ric > > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:52 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > > Ok your "spelling" remark was rude to all of us. > > > > > > You following remark despite it's poor grammar seems to say that the > > > rest of us are dumber that you. I'd have to say that it was ALL > > > rude. > > > > > > Ric Walsh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Walsh, Ric > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:32 AM > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > Ok what makes you such a wizard? Also add the word rude to > > > that. Have > > > you > > > > though of taking an anger management class? > > > > > > > > Ric Walsh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
