On 05/10/05, Derek Smithies wrote: > On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Nick Rout wrote: > > > > the real problem IMHO is ISP's filtering mail instead of passing it on. > > It is CPU intensive, you only have to look at the RECEIVED headers of > > some messages to see how long they spend in spamfilter.$ISP.com > > > > Make the end user filter their own spam, at least then the processing is > > distributed, ie my cpu filters my mail rather than forcing ot through a > > bottleneck at $ISP. > > Holy wars here. > I will define the word spam to include the virus ridden emails which have > the 50K attachments. > > If the isp chooses to provide an additional service, and charge for it, > then all power to them. We do live in a free world.
<Hat type="faithful TelstraClear employee"> Paradise and clear.net don't even charge for this service -- and customers can turn it on or off on a per mailboc basis. It was introduced due to customer demand. </Hat> > Further, the ISP is in a good position to determine the spam from the non > spam - they have access to a large body of email. Yuri -- ** WARNING to mailing list repliers ** Gmail over-rides "Reply-To:" field. Check your "To:" address before sending reply to this post.
