[69335] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Anti-Spam Router -- opinions?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Tue Apr 6 13:32:04 2004
To: Matthew Crocker <matthew@crocker.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:14:31 EDT."
<DE88ADFE-87ED-11D8-9653-000A956885D4@crocker.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:28:57 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_888680883P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:14:31 EDT, Matthew Crocker said:
> IF you can rate-limit them across the whole Internet, If you limit 2
> million machines to 20 msgs/day per mail server you are back up to your
> 10 Billion msgs/day mark. This is where DCC or other distributed
> checksum systems come into play.
My point was that there's no real *need* to distinguish between a legitimate
user sending 20 emails and an 0wned box sending 20 emails, as the distinction
is "legitimate 20 emails" versus "0wned 20K emails".
If I were to only give my users 20 outbound connections/day, there wouldn't be
a per-mail-server issue. Whether I can make such a policy stick is another
question entirely.
--==_Exmh_888680883P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFAcujZcC3lWbTT17ARAuTwAJ9Dk40/6B7O/Rqpr7tYTcF9K2nK+ACgoF7H
CiKLUvehJ1KpYgU3+cXH9Mg=
=jdqh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_888680883P--
