a note to those who would automate their rejection notices
jared at puck.nether.net
Sun Dec 28 01:06:59 UTC 2003
On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 05:29:14PM -0600, Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
> Doug Luce wrote:
> > I'm scared to death of false positives.
> That is in and of itself scary. What on earth is there about
> computers and networks (assumptions: Not connected to weapons,
> weapon delivery systems or vehicles, or high-energy sources) that
> would account for somebody being "scared to death"?
I find that if you set the threshold for SA high (eg: 15+)
it works well. I recently started dumping the 300+ spam I get a day
into /dev/null if it hits the bayes99-100% range. Helps a lot. I also
do a lot of whitelisting by IP and by email address for those people that
seem to like to trip my filters.
> Gee whiz. We are talking about email, right?
Actually, email is more important than being able to browse
the web/internet to be perfectly honest.
This was a common theme at my previous ISP. We'd have all sorts
of other problems, but the single thing that would generate the most calls
was email being down.
Our upstream could be down and us having no backup link available
but if email worked the call volume would be lower as people could perform
People take how their e-mail is handled very seriously.
> But If I am going to send something that I really do want to be sure
> gets delivered, I'll use Federal Express.
Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared at puck.nether.net
clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
More information about the NANOG