nanog mailing list archives
Re: SMTP rate-limits [Was: Re: ingress SMTP]
From: Tony Finch <dot () dotat at>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 16:41:30 +0100
On Fri, 5 Sep 2008, Michael Thomas wrote:
I thought that these bot nets were so massive that it is pretty easy for them to fly under the radar for quotas, rate limiting, etc. Not that all bot nets are created equal, and there aren't local hot spots for whatever reason, but putting on the brakes in a way that users wouldn't feel pain is simply not going to make any appreciable difference in the overall mal-rate.
Right. In practice the rate of delivery failures is a more useful indication of spam than the overall email rate. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <dot () dotat at> http://dotat.at/ IRISH SEA: NORTHEASTERLY BACKING NORTHERLY 6 TO GALE 8, BUT CYCLONIC 5 IN SOUTH AT FIRST. MODERATE BECOMING ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD.
Current thread:
- SMTP rate-limits [Was: Re: ingress SMTP] Paul Ferguson (Sep 05)
- Re: SMTP rate-limits [Was: Re: ingress SMTP] Michael Thomas (Sep 05)
- Re: SMTP rate-limits [Was: Re: ingress SMTP] Tony Finch (Sep 05)
- RE: SMTP rate-limits [Was: Re: ingress SMTP] Frank Bulk (Sep 06)
- Re: SMTP rate-limits [Was: Re: ingress SMTP] Michael Thomas (Sep 05)