Ed Leafe wrote: > That's just the way it is. The fact that my server rejected 87% of > the mail based on header info such as address verification, etc., > means that it didn't have to process the entire message in order to > find out it was crap, which is about the best solution you can > expect, given the current SMTP protocol. > >
How do you affix a cost (waste/loss) to these kinds of things? Obviously you've cut your losses significantly by filtering most of this crap out ahead of time, but I wonder about all of those "wasted electrons" and the cost of such? In some weird way, are we losing much electricity globally on this kind of crap? -- Michael J. Babcock, MCP MB Software Solutions, LLC http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com http://fabmate.com "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
