IP address reputation, BorderWare

[Hugo van der Kooij]

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, Rick Chadderdon wrote:

> Res wrote:
>>  On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Kevin Miller wrote:
>> 
>> >  Bandwidth that isn't used by a spammer is bandwidth that is available
>> >  for your users to use.  No magic there.  Think freeway - would you
>> >  rather drive it under rush hour conditions or 3am conditions?
>>
>>  And since 75% of all internet pkts these days is spam your point is valid.
>
> Hardly.  I've still seen nobody provide any evidence that any of this insane 
> spam bandwidth directly affects the experience *any* of us have on the 'net. 
> (Indirect effects, I mean.  Obviously spam we receive affects us.)  Kevin 
> suggested that the last mile wasn't important, but that's all that *is* 
> important to any consumer.  If I'm getting what I pay for, and the price is 
> one I'm willing to pay, as a consumer I *don't care* how much of the 
> bandwidth I'm *not* getting is being used by spammers.  In fact, to be fair, 
> if the 75% figure is true then it's fairly safe to say that we'd be paying 
> *more* for our bandwidth if the spammers hadn't placed such a demand on the 
> infrastructure that it had to be improved and the amount of bandwidth 
> available increased.  Without them, the providers would still be charging us 
> the old rates.  I don't see anyone lining up to thank the spammers for making 
> home broadband affordable.  I remember a decade ago...   At home, I was 
> paying about five times what I currently pay for 10 megabits - just to get 
> dual-channel DSL. (128K)

Most interresting. But the 75% figures only accounts for the number of 
SPAM messages versus the total number of messages.

I could get a lot of spam on an old 115k2 serial interface cable modem. 
Yet if someone was stupid enough to try and squeeze a 5 MB attachent 
through per email the links was stuck for minutes. (That was 10 years 
ago.)

Today people fill their DSL bandwidth downloading movies and such. So 
wasting bandwidth needs to be redefined. Just how many spam messages can 
one squeeze in the bandwith taken by a single DVD rip?

Which is propably why most home users never notice the spam bot on their 
machine. They use so much more bandwith for other things that a spam 
message send each minute is never noticed.

Hugo.

-- 
 	hvdkooij at vanderkooij.org	http://hugo.vanderkooij.org/
 	    This message is using 100% recycled electrons.

 	Some men see computers as they are and say "Windows"
 	I use computers with Linux and say "Why Windows?"
 		(Thanks JFK, for the insight.)