Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again.

Larry W. Virden (lvirden@cas.org)
Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:47:41 -0500 (EST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Chris Lewis: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Previous message: Rich Lafferty: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
In reply to: Rich Kulawiec: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Next in thread: Rich Kulawiec: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Next in thread: Rich Lafferty: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Reply: Rich Kulawiec: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."

I was contacted today by our networking and os staff today asking what
the impact on staff would be to pull the plug on usenet.

usenet here is taking 15% of our T1 link, and 12 gig (?) of disk space for
our 1-5 day leaf node usenet holding. Of that, I suspect that more than 30%
has to do with spam or hipcrime.

-- 
Larry W. Virden                 <URL: mailto:lvirden@cas.org>
<URL: http://www.purl.org/NET/lvirden/> <*> O- "No one is what he seems."
Unless explicitly stated to the contrary, nothing in this posting should 
be construed as representing my employer's opinions.

Next message: Chris Lewis: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Previous message: Rich Lafferty: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
In reply to: Rich Kulawiec: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Next in thread: Rich Kulawiec: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Next in thread: Rich Lafferty: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Reply: Rich Kulawiec: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."

[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]