My points exactly! It would be cool and could be made to work, but in the
end, it's futile/pointless/a lost cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu
[mailto:Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 4:00 PM
To: Jason Hihn
Cc: Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Giving Public Notice ....
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 15:48:30 EST, Jason Hihn said:
out over the SMTP socket. I don't know what this would break
though. IANAL,
but I'd like to think it was binding. I think the problem
though would be
who would it be binding to? The remote outgoing network (AOL-TW in the
advent of it coming from an aol server?) or the sender? Either way it's
good, but I like it if the network (AOL) is liable. It'll make them make
sure no spam leaves their domain.
I'm not sure you could possibly make it binding - the only thing
that usually
looks at SMTP replies are SMTP client software. So unless you
create an RFC
describing the format so it can be *parsed* by software, it's the
ones-and-zeros
equivalent of urinating into the wind.
Backward compatibility becomes an issue - what happens if the
sender's SMTP
doesn't have support for the extension and the parsing it involves?
And given that the spam probably came in through an open proxy
server, it's
basically a lost cause - if the proxy site couldn't afford to
hire a sysadmin
with enough clue to close the proxy, they're probably effectively
judgment proof.
Kinda like suing somebody for $3M when they live in a tar paper
shack and can't
afford a telephone or running water.
I suppose if you made it like a click-through EULA, it would be
OK.. except
for the minor detail that almost all our outbound mail is
gatewayed through
a machine that won't be able to click.... ;)
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg