On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 08:58:29AM -0700, Vernon Schryver wrote:
No, Dave's response was on target. If ISPs would enforce strict T&C,
there would be no spam. User names and passwords are required to send
spam, and ISPs could terminate accounts for spamming. Expecting ISPs
to revoke certs for spam when they now refuse to termiante accounts
for spam makes no sense.
One can make this case, but I have always felt the IETF's broader goal was
suport of an end-to-end internet. As such, ISPs are just there to route
packets, not to enforce policy. Can we attain that 100%? Probably not,
but we certainly want to try.
The irony of this is amazing. I remember one day on slashdot there were
two highly active threads. One was about the value of the end to end
principle, and the other was about a UDP for the largest australian ISP which
had
too many spammers on it. (Blocking all usenet postings from the ISP, even
from the innocent users.)
All day long most of us decry when ISPs and firewalls take policy steps, trying
to ban certain protocols, putting in secret proxies, stopping you from
natting, and we tell them they should worry about their core business, which
is routing packets quickly and reliably. Then when their downstreams
do something we don't like, we blame them for non-enforcement.
I'm not saying we might not, in the end, have to give up some of the end
to end principle to stop spam. But we should do so kicking and screaming.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg