ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] Nucleus of a draft BCP on filtering

2003-03-08 09:21:27
From: "Chris Lewis" <clewis(_at_)nortelnetworks(_dot_)com>

...
  One glaring difference in behaviour is volume.  But the net isn't
currently set up to even be *aware* of volume.

What about things like the DCC?  The fundamental purpose and idea of
the DCC is to measure the volume of mail messages.

That leads to an interesting question: can we extend the lower layers of 
the Internet protocols (eg: at TCP/IP) to allow someone to specify and 
enforce rate limiting in such a way as to seriously affect spam?

Unfortunately, I think not.  Consider striker - that's a broad-source 
attack.  Any one of the IPs spamming striker has less volume than some 
of our legitimate senders. Anyone disagree?

The lower layers have since practically the beginning been set up to
measure rates and some ISPs have since the 1980's been set u to "specify
and enforce rate limiting."  Recall the rates that said "buy a T1 and
pay for a 56K unless and until you use more."

You also said "in such a way as to seriously affect spam".  The fact
that all email including spam is a small part of the total bandwidth
used kills the idea of doing much about spam by counting raw bits.


Vernon Schryver    vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg