[SpamCop-List] My assessment of "Mailhosts" system

[Antoine J. Mechelynck]

I have read some earlier posts, yet I still start a new thread because I don't
answer directly to any of them.

The new system definitely takes some getting used to.

For me, configuring was not a fingersnap thing (one-day wait or so for someone
at SC to review my "complex" configuration). In the meantime I obeyed the
regulations and didn't report anything. But I guess I must have some 200 queued
spam by now. Let's hope I can wade through them before I have to discard too
many new incoming spam. Oh, well, time will tell.

The human authorisation came through on a Saturday, which was a nice surprise.
(I was thinking I would have to bite my nails until Monday -- and Monday evenig
at my place, to take care of timezone lag.)

The new system identifies my "own" Received-lines (typically 3 per email)
without fuss, which I deem is a GOOD thing, since IIUC it uses less computer
resources at SC (CPU time, network bandwidth, etc.) to do a given job. Someone
spoke of the new system looking like spaghetti code. To me, on the contrary, it
looks like slicing through the Gordian knot.

The new system systematically regards any Received-lines from "unidentified"
routers as "forgeries". This is apparently intentional, and so far, AFAICT
(which isn't much) it seems to identify the injection point correctly. I hope it
won't fall into snags when (not if) my ISP next puts a new battery of mail
routers into service, a few months or years from now. Oh well, let's hope I
catch them then.

Now, here are a few things I noticed, not specifically related to the new
system. I noticed them while scrutinizing the new system's parses more
attentively than I usually did, trying not to be caught by possible "childhood
illnesses" of the new system.

    -    SC runs the "origin of spam" IP through several DNSBL servers. I don't
see .bl.spamcop.net among them. There must be a reason, but I daresay it escapes
me.

    -    A respectable proportion of spam has no forged received-lines at all
(the only ones I see in them were put there by my own ISP).

Summary: The new system seems to give -- in my case -- about as good results as
the old one, using less resources to do it. I'm not going back, or at least not
for the time being.

I'll try to come back and see (at least) if this post gets any response; but
don't expect to see my byline very often: OE has become so sluggish here, that I
may have to do all my NG reading using NS7.

Good hunting!
Tony.