Ed Leafe wrote:
> That's just the way it is. The fact that my server rejected 87% of
> the mail based on header info such as address verification, etc.,
> means that it didn't have to process the entire message in order to
> find out it was crap, which is about the best solution you can
> expect, given the current SMTP protocol.
>
>
How do you affix a cost (waste/loss) to these kinds of things?
Obviously you've cut your losses significantly by filtering most of this
crap out ahead of time, but I wonder about all of those "wasted
electrons" and the cost of such? In some weird way, are we losing much
electricity globally on this kind of crap?
--
Michael J. Babcock, MCP
MB Software Solutions, LLC
http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com
http://fabmate.com
"Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!"
©2007 MB Software Solutions |
