> It's not rocket science, it's email. Depending on inhouse skills
> such critical piece of infrastructure has to be maintained in-house.
> If you're too small, get an external consultant in to set up the
> systems and processes, and control of processes.
Unfortunately, for a very large majority of people (even skilled C coders /
kernel hackers), running a well configured email server is a bit tough .. at
least far tougher than it seems to be.
Quite a few mail admins (including some at rather large ISPs) aren't the
sort I personally would hire to admin an etch a sketch, let alone a
production mail system.
There's also the other little issues such as redundant network connectivity,
backup / disaster recovery etc etc.
Next challenge - clue in spam filtering: again not as easy as it sounds.
More than one guy working for corporate networks, ISPs etc belongs to the
Wile E Coyote school of spam filtering.
You know, when a trained mining engineer is given a bundle of dynamite and
wants to blow a hole in a pile of rocks, he blows just the hole .. and knows
enough not to bring the rocks crashing down on his head.
Now, give Wile E the same bundle of dynamite and tell him to blow a hole in
the rocks so that the roadrunner will fall through the hole and (finally!)
become dinner, you know what happens.
That's just what the issue is with a lot of people who filter spam.
* Misled by FUD (about SPF and sender id, for example)
* Don't have any discrimination on what to block and what not to block - end
up blocking a large ISP just because they are too dumb to read forged
headers.
etc etc etc. Having been in this industry for a decade ++, I can tell you
that it is not as easy as it sounds. And if you care rather more for the
reliability of your email (as in, consider it mission critical) - then you
quite probably want to sink a lot of money into it, and hire the right
people to handle it. If not outsource it.
srs
>
> > Back when Google started gmail, there was quite a bit of discussion
> in
> > Silk about it. There were quite a few against it and some of the
>
> Why would you use free email by a company that's reading your mail and
> selling you ads, and doing heavy data mining on your data? Are you nuts?
>
> > concerns were that Google was going to keep it searchable even after
> it
>
> That's not a concern. Google never deletes anything. Why should they do
> it in this instance? What kind of proof can they offer that they
> deleted
> you data? What about the ISPs, and the TLAs, will they issue proof that
> they deleted all the tapped data, too?
>
> > has been deleted and such. I was wondering if those who were against
> it
> > then have something interesting to say about this article by Cringley.
>
> Why are speculations on speculations interesting?
>
> --
> Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org
> ______________________________________________________________
> ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
> 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
