J C Lawrence wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 05:12:19 -0700
Larry Marks <larry(_dot_)marks(_at_)barberry(_dot_)com> wrote:
I believe that it is and has been within the power of ISPs to provide
a safe haven from spam without introducing instability into the
system. They would need to form or affiliate with an NCRPA-compliant
body and agree on some consistent and enforceable ways of applying
DNSbls and other anti-spam mechanisms. This could start now with
existing mechanisms and later add new mechanisms as appropriate.
The more ISPs do such a thing, the less value and interest for the
remaining ISPs to do so.
Huh? Why?
As soon as it becomes legally required its not a code of conduct, its a state
tax and mandate which is to be fought and lowest-bidder
only-the-letter-of-the-law penny-saved wherever possible. Incredibly shrinking
margins and mass market economic forces dictate that clearly. Across the
international scene, naive national self-interest would encourage foreign
systems to Do Their Own Different Thing.
I really didn's say anything about legal requirement in the post to
which you are responding. But even so, what you're saying is total
nonsense. It works for the PSTN.
Your comment is preposterous.
Sorry. Reality is often preposterous. It also happens to be true.
You, and even I may prefer it otherwise, but at the end of the day that
is the way current networks operator and what happens.
Yes. It is the way they operate and it's incredibly stupid and I'm not
going to take it anymore.
A network already exists. I don't need to go build another one. And
mail is an end-to-end service and always has been. In fact, it's a
commercial service offered to the public.
Absolutely. Its a commercial service stated as:
We guarantee to use industry best practices to deliver your email to
its destination. We make no guarantees as to whether the recipient or
their proxy (in the form of the remove ISP) will accept or handle your
email.
Nonsense. If you have not made efforts to establish bilateral agreements
with other ISPs, then you haven't used best practices for the
telecommunications industry.
When I send a message via my ISP to someone on another ISP, it is
highly unlikely that it will traverse any systems that are not there
to make money for their owners by carrying my traffic. For that
reason, I have every right to expect that great care will be taken
from one end to the other.
This is generally true, and, in the general case, email works very well
in supporting these expectations.
Does that mean that I should be able to sue if someone doesn't take
great care?
Finally, you said, "you get to pick". Actually, you don't.
Nope. You do, its just that the cost of making that choice is high. In
fact, people make that choice daily. As a trite example: Car dealers
that want to work with Freightliner must install a private T1 from their
dealer to Freightliner (required by Freightliner) before they can do
electronic business with Freightliner.
Excessive cost is a barrier for most users. This does not constitute a
choice.
Attempting to enforce contract agreement end-to-end in the abstract and
general case is infeasible in the general case (tho very possible as a
custom point-to-point paid-for service). Attempting to establish full
consent for any change in operational characteristics before making
changes is ludicrous -- How many other ISPs across the planet would I
have to get to sign off?
Well then, I guess the bumblebee can't fly and the PSTN can't possibly
operate.
-LM
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg