nanog mailing list archives

Re: Barracuda Networks Spam Firewall


From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:19:52 -0400

On Tue, 18 May 2004 16:56:30 EDT, "Christopher X. Candreva" <chris () westnet com>  said:

But if you really need a reason to convince someone who won't get their head 
out of their . . . the sand -- You can probably cut in half the number of 
viruses you have to scan if you reject invalid addresses up front, meaning 
you can buy a smaller/ fewer virus scanner(s).

Which means the companies making them have absolutely no incentive to add 
this feature.

Right.  Mirapoints are that way too (at least in our configuration).  And yes,
we'll probably have to buy a 5th Mirapoint and/or upgrade our current 4 sooner
because of it - but the incremental cost for that is *still* lower than the
cost of replacing them with another vendor's gear....

Now how do you explain to the CFO that in order to get around a $50K upgrade
to the current gear, you want to spend $200K to bring in another vendor? :)


Attachment: _bin
Description:


Current thread: