From: J C Lawrence <claw(_at_)kanga(_dot_)nu>
Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui(_at_)plaidworks(_dot_)com> wrote:
> I think this is a key issue -- if you send an e-mail to someone, I
> think there has to be an assumption of consent to accept a
> response. But OTOH, I'm not sure it implies a permanent willingness to
> accept a communication relationship.
Quite, and its this logic, along with the risk of consent tokens being
leaked to and abused by spammers which persuades me that consent tokens
must be able to be date limited. Without that a consent token becomes
an infinite get-into-my-mailbox-free card.
> so perhaps there ought to be two forms of consent here: a one time use
> key and a revocable consent key, something that can be embedded in a
> header or in some other way in the return mail to unlock the door.
Currently I'm thinking about consent tokens having three potential
properties:
1) Date range
2) Sender address
3) Date range and sender address
Those three would seem to cover the bases, from list posts, to bounce
forwarded messages, to tardy repliers etc. MUAs would handle the dirty
work of tracking etc.
Why give someone a key at all?
A consent token is like a temporary whitelist(with the obvious diference
that a token can be used by a different sender), so why not do temporary
whitelisting? then the user has control, and can cancel the whitelist entry,
or make it permenant.
also with opt-in/opt-out, my system allows a user to see istantly everywhere
they are opted-in, and gives them the ability to remove items, and opt-out
easily.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw(_at_)kanga(_dot_)nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg