Re: [Asrg] Spam Ecomomics

>So what are we saying? Systemic destruction of spam is not necessary? 

No, we're saying that the high speed backbones, which I gather is the
part of the net with which you are most familiar, is not where the
significant costs of spam occur.

I'd be interested to hear where the 30% extra number comes from, since
I've never heard anyone else claim anything like that other than
perhaps specialty networks that mostly do e-mail.

>> I believe that even with 90% spam, the number of backbone bits used
>> for email is less than that used for web pages or for file sharing.
>> 
>> The costs of spam are out at the edges, mail servers and customer
>> support.
>
>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.

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