I've never heard it put so clearly and accurately before. Thanks for that clarity George. I will pass on that explanation to my subscribers. As always, failure - to Microsoft - is a feature......
Trent ----------- Trent M. Davenport - Systems Administrator Northern Television Systems Ltd - WHTV 203-4103 4th Avenue, Whitehorse, YT Y1A 1H6 (867) 393-2225 X204, (867) 393-2224 FAX www.whtvcable.com <http://www.whtvcable.com> ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of George Kulman Sent: September 24, 2002 12:51 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] (not so)Hotmail problems? Len, Shame on you for flaming Microsoft when all they're doing is fulfilling a commitment that they made to their customers. They promised to substantially reduce spam to their notmail (that's not a misspelling) clients by implementing the Brightmail solution, and they're certainly accomplishing that very nicely by not accepting most e-mail. The fact that valid e-mail can't get through is of little to no consequence to them. After all, they are reducing spam as promised. George Kulman Partner Ridge Systems, L.L.C. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Len Conrad Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 1:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] (not so)Hotmail problems? hotmail MX's have been/are a fscking mess. As befits the Evil Empire, they are arrogant @ssholes towards the rest of Internet. You don't publish A records for MX hosts that you know aren't functional, since if you do, other peoples' mail servers will waste their time trusting the MX/A records and try to contact them. I think Hotmail's current catastrophe may be related to the fact that Brightmail is supplying them with IMGate-type of MX host machines to fight the horrendous SPAM problems that Hotmail's policies have visted on their 110 million Hotmail users. I suppose MS is insisting that the Brightmail machines be W2K, but W2K MX's already couldn't handle the load with no anti-abuse policies to apply, HTF are they going to handle the significant extra processing/disk load of Brigtmail policies? Here's what IMGate saw yeterday when trying to delivery a msgs to hotmail: Host/Domain Summary: Message Delivery (top 20) sent cnt bytes defers avg dly max dly host/domain -------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------- 461 21352k 1 14.1 s 20.1 m aol.com 208 4524k 0 5.3 s 54.0 s yahoo.com 205 3695k 144 13.1 m 3.4 h hotmail.com I put the other big ISP's up there for comparison to embarrass MS/Hotmail to the max. The above is typical for every day. Those MS/Hotmail clowns don't have clue about infrastructure management. Len To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
