> On Jul 10, 2020, at 5:35 PM, Kris Deugau <kdeu...@vianet.ca> wrote: > > Charles Sprickman wrote: >> That’s unrealistic. Many ISPs these days that aren’t the “big boys” with >> dedicated staff for every facet of ISP operations, they are one and two man >> shops running WISPs in rural areas or developing countries. It’s not the >> 90’s anymore. It’s a terrible default, even home users should have to take >> an effort to enable a commercial service. > > I'm baffled by how a "one or two man shop [W]ISP" can have an in-house email > system that generates more queries than the free limits unless you're > outsourcing nearly everything else including DNS caching. (At which point, > why are you not outsourcing your mail service and spam filtering too?) From > personal experience, a provider of that size likely has less than 1000 > customers, which should match to mail flow well under the free limit. > > I started work for one such small ISP in 2001 with ~2600 users at peak > (granted, the spam landscape was quite different then), and when that company > got taken over by a larger company in 2003, moved on to maintaining the spam > filtering for that larger company. > > In that position we still weren't crossing the free query limits for a while, > at ~40K users. None of the five or six other small mail systems I've had > some hand in integrating have come close to the free limits, and several of > those providers have had ~10-15 full-time staff. All of them *have* had > local caching, even if it was built into some nightmare black-box mail > appliance horror, or Microsoft's DNS cache from Windows Server 2003 (or > possibly older, only got involved in the fringes of that one). > > It's not impossible, I'll grant (one guy I knew of a year or two ahead in > university was - in 1997 or so - getting IIRC more than ~5K spams daily, > personally), but I'd call it extremely rare even today.
The letter I got was for an ISP that has less than 1,000 mailboxes and queries two local, caching resolvers. C > > -kgd
