| |||||||||||
Restricting outbound SMTPRestricting outbound SMTPPosted Jun 26, 2004 1:20 UTC (Sat) by Baylink (subscriber, #755)In reply to: Restricting outbound SMTP by giraffedata Parent article: Large ISPs ponder spam Options cost money, yes, but the amount of money that option would cost would likely be epsilon compared to the amount of money they would *save* by not having to overprovision the links for the spam. Anyone up for conspiracy theory? It's Seagate and the carriers who are behind all the spam. :-)
(Log in to post comments)
Restricting outbound SMTP Posted Jun 26, 2004 2:55 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] Absolutely, but the point I made is that it is cheaper still to have no option, not overprovision for spam, and not allow anyone to connect to an extra-ISP SMTP server. I argue that this is a more likely eventuality than ISPs allowing people to opt in to SMTP routing.
|
|||||||||||