ximian evolution

[wizard at neonedge.com (Wizard)]

Worst of all, they are even masquerading as valid mail servers and relays,
which are ignored by AOL. I often get bounced mail from AOL that is sent
from "contact at bostonhot.com" to invalid addresses (which assumes that AOL is
trying to deliver it) and the headers say it is from bostonhot.com. The
funny part is that there is no bostonhot.com mail server. It just doesn't
exist. And the IP that the mail is coming from is in Asia, yet the server is
in Randolph. The part that annoys me is that if I ever decide to setup a
mail server for bostonhot, it will likely be blocked by most spam filters.
Grant M.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Braun [mailto:richb at pioneer.ci.net]
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 3:55 PM
> To: discuss at blu.org
> Subject: Re: ximian evolution
>
>
> Derek Marin wrote:
> > measures like this one, while well-intentioned, will only serve to
> > irritate some segment of the legitimate user community who are not
> > content to use the Internet as they would a TV, but will do very little
> > to prevent spam.  Real spammers will not be hindered by such measures...
>
> Absolutely right on the money.
>
> Robert L Krawitz <rlk at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > (In my own experience when I've done system administration, I've
> > always found it a lot easier to use a central smart relay anyway.)
>
> There are a number of reasons *not* to want to use someone else's
> smart relay:
>
> - You are adding at least one more point of failure
> - The mail will often take longer to get through, and delivery won't be as
> predictable
> - Big beefy mail servers are less scaleable (and require more
> sysadmin effort/
> upgrades to maintain stability as traffic increases) than simply
> letting each
> user's computer do the work
> - It can be tapped or logged more easily by crackers or snoopy government
> officials
> - Delivery rules will likely change unpredictably over time,
> causing messages
> to get munged, truncated, tagged as spam, or otherwise mutilated
> - If implemented on a large scale, centralization could lead to increasing
> costs to consumers
>
> I do *not* support any attempt to centralize the decentralized
> architecture of
> peer-to-peer network applications, most *especially* SMTP.
>
> As a method of combatting spam, "smart" relays are a non-starter;
> in fact I'd
> call them "stupid".  I like having my very own SMTP server, thank
> y'all very
> much.
>
> There are better ideas out there.
>
> Besides, since when did the Linux user community look to the
> likes of AOL for
> engineering improvements to our collective Internet experience?  ;-)
>
> -rich
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://www.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>