However, what is the harm in making an RFC and then find out if enforcers
you appear to presume that you can get consensus support for such a plan
from within IETF.
No, no. I try to never beg.
I came here to make a public proposal and some points for the purposes of
public record. I never expected any one to really do any thing on this
proposal now. But by placing the idea into public domain now, as the rate of
spam approaches the asymptote of 100%, then mailing list administrators can
come back to this idea as a way to save themselves. Actually at that point,
they won't need the RFC or STD, because all bulk email will be blocked and they
will be forced to just go straight to offering a "pull" solution (whether it be
web, usenet, pop or whatever) so recievers can still get their mailing list
messages amongst the 10,000 spams per day.
I am not sure exactly how long this will take, but without another solution or
paradigm shift, I figure 2 - 5 years tops.
even if you could get such support (which you cannot)
How do survey their opinion??
note that there's no enforcement of IETF's other opinions, even in cases where
failure to adhere to IETF standards costs billions of dollars every year. why
would this case be any different?
Because enforcers want to do something and will be under increasing pressure to
do something against bulk email.
there are a lot of ways to solve the spam problem that will work if "everybody
does it my way."
I have seen none. Email signing won't work. No amount of <!plonks> from Randy
Bush will change that.
Changing SMTP won't work long term, etc..
so far, nobody has figured out how to impose their will on
the rest of the net.
It is not my, your, or IETF will, but the votes of 500 million (through their
actions against spam) that will impose.