[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [cobalt-users] E-mail Catch All
- Subject: RE: [cobalt-users] E-mail Catch All
- From: "John A. Federico" <cobalt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue Oct 22 11:09:01 2002
- List-id: Mailing list for users to share thoughts on Sun Cobalt products. <cobalt-users.list.cobalt.com>
On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Dan Kriwitsky wrote:
> >
> > True. But anything coming from trafficmagnet.net (or .com)
> > goes right to /dev/null anyway...
> >
>
> Accepting the spam and sending it to /dev/null does not stop the spam.
> It's just an illusion to make you think you're not getting spam or using
> your bandwidth.
Ok. Fine. But either way you're processing spam - you're denying the
spammer from sending mail to the box (still utilizing CPU cyles/bandwidth)
or you're sending it into oblivion.
Is the difference in consumed resources that much greater in the second
scenario than the first?
-jf.