Come on Len!  Figure out something for us Windows users!  IMGate sounds
good, but many of us don't want to mess with Unix/Linux boxes.

Have a good weekend.


Eddie Cornejo, Sys Admin
Tom Rowe & Associates
956-412-6600 Ext.10
Toll Free USA 888-866-7693
Toll Free Canada 877-866-7693
http://www.tomrowe.com 

 


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Len Conrad
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 10:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Any solution for this?


>My main IMail server is very secure and I have no problems with it.  I 
>use the SMTP feature of IIS6 on a different server as my "store and
forward"
>mail server in the event my IMail box is down.  This is where the 
>problem is!

all MXs must be able to implement policies.  Can MS SMTP SVC implement
policies? If not, it sucks worthlessly as an MX (eg, your experience).

>My store and forward server is getting hit with about 500 messages a
minute.
>Only about 2% of those messages are valid.  The bandwidth this uses 
>really pisses me off.

with spam running at 70 to 90% at many MXs, any SMTP service that requires
receiving ALL msgs in totality before rejecting will cost you $1000s/year in
lost bandwidth.

Some of the big IMGate MXs I admin for my clients would be burning 1 or 2
T-1s (sometimes mores) on spam alone if it weren't for IMGate.  That's $750
to $1500 bandwidth lost PER MONTH for cheapest N.America T-1s, and MUCH more
for non-NA. E-1s.

>Are the spammers intentionally looking for lower priority MX records?

of course.  They look for port 25 on ALL IPs, and they are doing that much
more aggressively, by the week.

>Is there any way to eliminate this problem (maybe I've overlooked 
>something in the setup)?

For the MS SMTP SVC as MX, no.

>Any suggestions would be appreciated...

Use an front-end MX that can implement policies, and preferably policies
based on envelope info alone.  IMGate is used by many Imail sites.

Using your (user services) mailbox server as an MX is getting less practical
as spam increases.  Separating mailbox services and MX policies onto two
different boxes is the best way to go.

>I'm sure others have this same problem!

of course.  and it's getting noticeably worse by the week.

Len


_____________________________________________________________________
http://MenAndMice.com/DNS-training : Denver; NYC; San Jose
http://IMGate.MEIway.com : free anti-spam gateway, runs on 1000's of sites


To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/


To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to