Re: [Asrg] Spam Ecomomics

"Hannigan, Martin" <hannigan@verisign.com> Fri, 31 December 2004 16:13 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA07872 for <asrg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:13:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CkPaS-0003Yr-1I for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:25:13 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CkPL8-00038W-Bb; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:09:22 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CkPAM-0007zG-0t for asrg@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:58:14 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA05972 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:58:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from falcon.verisign.com ([216.168.239.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CkPLv-0002re-33 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:10:11 -0500
Received: from VSVAPOSTALGW1.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (vsvapostalgw1.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com [10.170.12.38]) by falcon.verisign.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iBVFrKop000918; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:53:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: by vsvapostalgw1.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <Y05Q5RLX>; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:57:42 -0500
Message-ID: <A206819EF47CBE4F84B5CB4A303CEB7A14A474@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
From: "Hannigan, Martin" <hannigan@verisign.com>
To: "'sethb@panix.com'" <sethb@panix.com>, "'asrg@ietf.org'" <asrg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Spam Ecomomics
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:57:40 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: asrg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69


Yes. Based on how bit traffic is moved regardless of who moves it, once it's
off the backbone, its a loss leader, right in front of nntp.

-M


---
Martin Hannigan
hannigan@verisign.com
Verisign, Inc.


-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-bounces@ietf.org <asrg-bounces@ietf.org>
To: asrg@ietf.org <asrg@ietf.org>
Sent: Fri Dec 31 07:37:10 2004
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Spam Ecomomics

Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org> wrote:

> It is obvious HTTP would win, and P2P would be a good rival, but
> email is not far behind. Statistics change between different service
> providers, but when you need 30% more bandwidth because of spam,
> it's still a cost.
>
> Thing is, who makes money from these 30% being provided? Answer is,
> everyone but the lowest in the chain of consumers.

Only if the costs are passed on down.  If they can't be (which seems
to be the case now) then whoever eats them loses.  That's more likely
to be the ISPs.

Seth

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg