On Sunday, May 04, 2003 12:13 PM, Alan DeKok
[SMTP:aland(_at_)freeradius(_dot_)org] wrote:
Kee Hinckley <nazgul(_at_)somewhere(_dot_)com> wrote:
An alternative policy approach for sites implementing RMX lookups
would be to rate-limit non-RMX connections to some small amount of
bandwidth. Mail from non-RMX sites would still get through, but would
be punished relative to RMX aware sites.
What MTAs currently support rate-limiting?
I don't know. But there are lower layer rate limiters: QoS.
The solution to the spam problem will often require things outside
of the SMTP world. Bandwidth limitations on SMTP connections are just
one possibility.
I agree, and those approaches have and are being used. However they affect the
rate of reception of 'spam' and not 'spam' as a percentage of messages in the
MTS, I take your point though that many measures to reduce and prevent spam (as
well as technologies to combat it) will not have direct interaction with SMTP
or depend on it.
That's not saying that interaction with MTA software/processes won't occur only
no protocol interaction. There are some I suspect who would argue that all
'spaminess' must be detected in the SMTP transactions (and that has advantages)
I just don't buy it. I think the technologies to control the policy boundaries
for messaging exist and RMX is part of the solution, how much of a part I don't
know.
Daniel's piece on equilibrium was couched in the context of aliases and
.forward files, the question was how to handle that bit using RMX (or could it
be achieved at all, since it is posited as a deficiency).
-e
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg