And in general, the business needs of a firm providing free web based e-mail, vs. the business needs of a Fortune 500 company are a tad different. So are the usage patterns and a host of other factors. My only comment about RBLs as it related to your question (not being defensive, just reiterating for those who might have lost track) was that I hoped Microsoft would not integrate RBL functionality directly into the Exchange product because I felt that such solutions were best left to 3rd party vendors... and then proceeded to mention a couple of reasons why I thought this to be true.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin@;natco-inc.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:36 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > > I originally questioned about RBL's for exchange because we host a large > .com whose main stay of business is free web based email. > They have 100k plus users and get spammed to death. We have content > filtering tools, we can blacklist known spammers, and we can even shut > down > ip's at the router. They still get spammed to death hurting their service. > Customers complain. The owner of this .com asked us to use spamcop. Since > enlisting spam cop 100's of thousands emails are now refused a day!! All > of > the users were notified of the use of spamcop and were told to report any > emails that should have gotten thru. It has been 3 months now and one > reported email that should have gotten thru did not. Our customer is > happy, > his users are happy and we spend a lot less time tracking spammers. Our > servers are happy, our sans are happy, I'm happy. Oh our bandwidth is > happy > also!! > > -----Original Message----- > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:esojka@;NBME.org] > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:50 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > "You following remark ... Seems to say" ? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: William Lefkovics [mailto:william@;techsanctuary.org] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:26 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > "depsite it's poor grammar" ? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:bounce-exchange-104116@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Walsh, Ric > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:52 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > Ok your "spelling" remark was rude to all of us. > > > > You following remark despite it's poor grammar seems to say that the > > rest of us are dumber that you. I'd have to say that it was ALL rude. > > > > Ric Walsh > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Walsh, Ric > > > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:32 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > Ok what makes you such a wizard? Also add the word rude to > > that. Have > > you > > > though of taking an anger management class? > > > > > > Ric Walsh > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
