Prioritized e-mail servicing to reduce non-spam delay and loss: A performance analysis

International Journal of Network Management

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 325-344

  Marsono, Muhammad N ^a   El Kharashi, M Watheq ^b   Gebali, Fayez ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

^b The British University in Egypt   (Egypt)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER NETWORKS; INTERNET; MARKOV PROCESSES; QUEUEING THEORY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPAMMING;

E-MAIL SERVERS; SPAM E-MAILS;

ELECTRONIC MAIL;

EID: 51049117263     PISSN: 10557148     EISSN: 10991190     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/nem.664     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Yoshida K, Adachi F, Washio T, Motoda H, Homma T, Nakashima A, Fujikawa H, Yamazaki K. Density-based spam detector. In Proceedings of the Tenth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), Seattle, WA, August 2004; 486-493.
2. Goodman J, Heckerman D, Rounthwaite R. Stopping spam. Scientific American 2005; 292(4): 42-49.
3. Twining RD, Williamson MM, Mowbray M, Rahmouni M. Email prioritization: reducing delays on legitimate mail caused by junk mail. HP Digital Media Systems Laboratory, Bristol, UK, Technical Report HPL-2004-5(R.1), May 2004. Available: http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2004/HPL-2004-5Rl.pdf. [July 2007].
4. Segal R, Crawford J, Kephart J, Leiba B. Spamguru: an enterprise anti-spam filtering system. In Proceedings of the First Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (CEAS), Mountain View, CA, July 2004. Available: http://www.ceas.cc/papers-2004/126.pdf. [July 2007].
5. SpamAssassin. Available: http://spamassassin.apache.org/. [July 2007].
6. Tran M, Armitage G. Evaluating the use of spam-triggered TCP/IP rate control to protect SMTP servers. In Proceedings of the Australian Telecommunications Networks and Applications Conference (ATNAC), Sydney, Australia, December 2004; 329-335.
7. Marsono MN, El-Kharashi MW, Gebali F, Ganti S. A distributed e-mail classification for spam control. In Proceedings of the 2006 Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE 2006), Ottawa, Canada, May 2006; 438-441.
8. Bratko A, Filipič B. Spam filtering using compression models. Technical Report IJS-DP-9227, Department of Intelligent Systems, Jožef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2005.
9. Drucker H, Wu D, Vapnik V. Support vector machines for spam categorization. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 1999; 10(5): 1048-1054.
10. Markatos E. Speeding up TCP/IP: faster processors are not enough. In Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Performance, Computing, and Communications Conference (IPCCC 2002), Phoenix, AZ, April 2002; 341-345.
11. Gebali F. Computer Communications Networks: Analysis and Design (3rd edn). North Star Digital Design: Victoria, BC, Canada; 2004.
12. Gomes LH, Cazita C, Almeida JM, Almeida V, Wagner Meira J. Characterizing a spam traffic. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement (IMC), Taormina, Italy, October 2004; 356-369.
13. Marsono MN, El-Kharashi MW, Gebali F. Binary LNS-based naïve Bayes hardware classifier for spam control. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Circuit and System (ISCAS 2006), Kos, Greece, May 2006; 3674-3677.