[rescue] Spam (was: Perverse Question)
Charles Shannon Hendrix
shannon at widomaker.com
Mon Jun 9 14:16:15 CDT 2003
On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 12:58:51AM -0400, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> It would, and a significant processing overhead .... however, my
> thought is that if we can kill the spam, the gains in both from killing
> the spam would outweigh the costs in overhead. Overall, we'd end up
> with less CPU cycles and less bandwidth burned.
I suppose... probably would be a win for the larger servers anyway.
But for some... I'm not sure they could swing it.
I know that in places I've been, the mail servers were overtaxed as it
We only got upgrades when some suit sent himself mail to remember why he
was going back to his office, and it wasn't there yet when he arrived
with no idea what he was supposed to be doing... :)
UNIX/Perl/C/Pizza____________________s h a n n o n at wido !SPAM maker.com
More information about the rescue