On Sun, 1 Sep 2002, Ken Weingold wrote: > On Sat, Aug 31, 2002, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > > No, I will feel chained to my mail servers as people take that attitude, > > which has the nice effect of making it so they don't see the spam in their
I didn't realize the guy was arguing from a mail admin point of view. > I've been noticing that one too. I'm not familiar with Vipul's or > TMDA, but Spamassassin has a rule for when the From: and To: are the > same. I think from the ISP mail server admin's point of view he should wish to shift the CPU load to the end user. He has allready paid for the peer traffic, and now he could at least doesn't pay for ridiculous amounts of rackmount boxes. > > [2] BTW, if you get a clever idea for a new spam blocking system, please > > don't write it in perl. Anything that a serious mail server has to run per > > every message damn well better be in C or better. > > Oh. :) I think the bottleneck is pattern matching. As such it doesn't matter, as Perl's regexp stuff is highly optimized C.
