Barclay, Robert wrote:
Whether or not bulk email is treated differently than one to one
communication (and I think at least in transport it should not be) the
end goal should be for end users to have control over what email gets
into their In boxes right?
Right. But, you're (a) conflating where the technology is placed (MTA
versus MUA) with it being a user choice, and (b) ignoring fundamental
differences between classes of "provider".
In (a), consider user choice implemented in the MTA, not the MUA. Yes,
the technology already exists to do that. It's highly beneficial -
reduction of user bandwidth (think user on dialup line). Necessitating
not only that scoring/marking/whatever goes on in the MTA, the refusal
itself is done in the MTA.
In (b), consider us. We're a corporation, not an ISP. Corporate policy
not only prohibits certain materials, but the law also forces us to
block certain kinds of materials (specifically, workplace sexual
harrassment legislation). While the latter isn't spam per-se, it still
is done using anti-spam techniques at the MTA level to prevent innocent
end users getting bombarded by stuff they didn't ask for (which is what
spam is). [If non-spammed porn gets through to the end user, then it's
an HR issue...]
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg