IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Endymail] spam versus cleartext

Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name> Sun, 07 September 2014 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <cyrus@daboo.name>
X-Original-To: endymail@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: endymail@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEF891A0476 for <endymail@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 10:08:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.852
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XUChAQaTwLga for <endymail@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 10:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 287631A02FC for <endymail@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 10:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D927859320; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 13:02:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com
Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TdIpvGFjz5kZ; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 13:02:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.22] (unknown [173.13.55.49]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A82BA859309; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 13:02:17 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 13:07:56 -0400
From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, endymail@ietf.org
Message-ID: <CB73389C55B1C9BC50D5E016@cyrus-3.local>
In-Reply-To: <20140907170207.14888.qmail@joyce.lan>
References: <20140907170207.14888.qmail@joyce.lan>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0b1 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; size=790
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/endymail/Qe8qRXsbbPwSV78sgp-t1kQE7JI
Cc: watsonbladd@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Endymail] spam versus cleartext
X-BeenThere: endymail@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <endymail.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/endymail>, <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/endymail/>
List-Post: <mailto:endymail@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/endymail>, <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 17:08:05 -0000

Hi John,

--On September 7, 2014 at 5:02:07 PM +0000 John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> 
wrote:

> Keeping in mind that upwards of 90% of mail is spam, you're going to
> be downloading an order of magnitude mail if you do the filtering on
> the end device.  On a desktop with a cable connection that's probably
> OK.  On my phone, it's not.

True - which likely means you are going to want your desktop client to 
always be on and actively filtering your email so the mobile device is not 
forced to download something that will eventually get removed. That 
basically implies you are running a server (though you could call it an 
"agent") on your desktop and would want guarantees of uptime, etc. That is 
basically only a small step away from running your own mail server...

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email