J C Lawrence wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 11:34:11 -0700
Larry Marks <larry(_dot_)marks(_at_)barberry(_dot_)com> wrote:
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?
You have thought about this haven't you? The greater the percentage of
ISPs in such a confederation, the less value there is for any remaining
ISP to join, as they get all the values created by the group without any
of the costs.
Uh, yes, I have actually thought this through. You don't get the cert
unless you join and pay. No cert, no value. Use the cert without
joining, you get sued blind. That's not regulation either. It's tort law.
Actually it doesn't. It may work for the PSTN within the bounds of the
USA -- which is effectively one organisational entity, but it doesn't
necessarily work for the PSTN as soon as you cross International borders
and start dealing with the other, remote, largely uncontracted and
uninvolved services. Been there, done that.
Well, actually it does work across most borders, and has for years. Been
there, done that.
To a large extent each ISP and each MTA operator (in the organisational
sense) is analagous to a an independent liassez faire PSTN, and just to
make things richer than they are for the PSTN world, there are millions
of MTA operators instead of the small order hundreds of PSTN
organisations.
But I don't want a laissez faire PSTN. I want one with rules and order
so I can get my mail through.
Yes. It is the way they operate and it's incredibly stupid and I'm not
going to take it anymore.
Congratulations, and that is what we are here for. I would suggest
however that your current choice of target is a windmill.
You call it tilting at windmills. I call it getting in the face of the
ISPs so that they will do their jobs.
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.
You might notice that ISPs are not a telecommunications service
industry. Even in the PSTN world those things are frequently not
present and rarely to never guaranteed. Try calling the third world
some time, or even large chunks or rural Europe.
It is sophistry to argue that ISPs are not providing a
telecommunications service. They are.
There is a difference between things being in bad repair and things not
working because someone is standing in the way making them not work.
There are no guarantees in life. Even the old term, "guarenteed
delivery" only means best effort requiring notification in case of
failure. I thought 821/2821 already provide for that.
Actually, you don't have every expectation of great care. You have a
reasonable expectation that just enough care will be taken as is
justified by the revenue opportunity you represent and not a single iota
more. In fact, you can safely assume than slightly less effort will be
expended than the revenue opportunity you represent as service providers
know the "Good Enough Is Best" trade-offs very well. If the revenue
opportunity you represent is small, well, your mail will be treated
quite lackadaisically.
Just because you are just in it for the money does not release you from
your responsibility to treat my message with great care. No one made
you agree to handle mail traffic. You elected to be in that business.
You have to provide the service. What you have described is just unethical.
Does that mean that I should be able to sue if someone doesn't take
great care?
Sure! Do you have a violated contract?
Yup. It's called an implied contract and it's enforceable.
Absolute;y it is a choice, its just a more expensive choice than they
are willing to pay. It remains a choice however. I make the same
choice every day in not buying a Ferrari, and not driving at 150mph on
the road outside my house.
Give me your money or I'll take it from you. Is that a choice?
Well then, I guess the bumblebee can't fly and the PSTN can't possibly
operate.
The PSTN is a poor analogy for Internet mail systems. A better pick for
an analogy is probably postal services, and relatively, the utter lack
of delivery guarantees they provide. Of course value added services
like FedEx, DHL, etc exist which provide end-to-end guarantees as well
as tracking oversight, but those are value added services which charge a
significant premium.
You continue, without any justification to deny what is obvious to any
man on the street. Internet mail is a telecommunications service. ISP
stocks are listed in the telecommunications sector. It is not like the
postal service. It's not like FedEx and DHL. These are all end-to-end
services. There are no switches and only a single bilateral handoffs in
the international case. By contrast, PSTN's infrastructure is totally
analagous to that of the ISP.
I don't want end-to-end guarantees. I don't want special handling. But I
don't want people to interfere with my mail either, as long as it
doesn't violate the law and isn't spam. If it can't be delivered because
of some circumstance beyond control, then fine...
-LM
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg