> > ladd Nov 13 04:08:12 Disallowed gossinternational.com!ruiohfsd > > (gossinternational.com/124.172.212.142) to blocked name > > quanstro.net!b94cd358e11d3ffb43628c10bc786087 > > > > i think the idea of spooling email is largely discredited. > > it opens up the possiblity for backscatter spam, or the lack of > > delivery rejection notification. either one is not good. i think the > > acepting smtp server has to be in a position to make a definitive > > decision on disposition. (sorry.) > > The solution I described (a Bloom filter of all the valid addresses) > would work fine for this. An optimally sized Bloom filter requires > about 4.8 bits per power of ten per address. If you want a 1 in 1000 > chance of a spammy address getting through and have n valid addresses, > you need to a Bloom filter of size 3 * 4.8 * n = 14.4n bits.
i don't doubt the efficiency of bloom filters, but since these addresses are never repeated, i don't see how it would help. (i've gotten 1000s of these/day.) - erik
