At 11:04 AM -0500 3/27/03, Preston, Tony wrote:
I do have some questions about the solutions/ideas talked about. I
was wondering why not have the "TO:" field be required to be verifiable
from each stop. I know this would increase the bandwidth requirements
I'm not clear on what you mean by "To:" field. The To: field is what
the user and the MUA decide to put in the letter. It has nothing to
do with what gets delivered--that's on the envelope, which doesn't
get seen by the user--just the transport. There are lots of very
valid reasons why you may not want everyone to see who is in the To:
field, which is why mail programs provide Bcc.
But what does it mean to validate a To:? How is that different from
either receiving or bouncing the email message?
Next, I do think you need federal legislation that creates the email
equivalent of a "do not call" list that any legitimate bulk emailer
must consult. I think it must be accepted that bulk emailers are
going to be around, will operate with/without your consent...
See my posting on "RE: [Asrg] 5b. Opt-Out, 2nd version". Email is
not like the phone system. Not only is opt-out unlikely to impact
any of your spam, it's quite likely to increase it.
get rid of the junk...(interesting enough, 99% of my spam is in html
email which I never read, if it gets to me as html and valid I tell
the person to use plain text and add them to my whitelist).
A common techie comment. However based on my involuntary wormalert
survey (which is to say, I'm getting the email involuntarily--but I
might as well use it while I have it), about 60% of "end-user" email
is HTML.
Any solution that requires users to change their tools/upgrade/do something
different is OK, they have the incentive to do it so as to
get rid of spam.
Only if the pain of the new something is less than the pain of spam.
Any solution that requires an ISP to change/upgrade/do something different
is much less likely to happen since you still have open relys out there
that haven't been updated in years... If it costs money it aint
You forget the numbers. ISPs number in the thousands. Users in the
hundred millions. ISP upgrades are more likely. Those open servers
aren't ISP servers--they are small companies and clueless users.
Different problem.
gonna happen. Besides, my ISP could get into trouble if they started
blocking emails I wanted...
They almost certainly already do.
--
Kee Hinckley
http://www.puremessaging.com/ Junk-Free Email Filtering
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg