On Fri, 9 May 2003 13:05:37 -0600 (MDT)
Vernon Schryver <vjs(_at_)calcite(_dot_)rhyolite(_dot_)com> wrote:
I see Challenge/Response as the final threshhold of Spam Blocking. If
it is done wrong on a large scale, it could sour the idea for
everyone. Then when a truly good way to impliment it comes, everyone
will dismiss it as having the same old problems. ...
I don't understand how anyone might hope that Challenge/Response won't
be done wrong on a large scale even with completely clear standards
track RFC. Perhaps my point of view is colored by old scars inflicted
by large outfits.
Certainly the clearly written standards on vacation bots have shown us
what behaviour we can expect on a regular basis.
I've not responded to you counters to my counters to your points about
Challenge/Response systems, because unless you're working on an ID, I
fear it would be a waste of effort.
Would it be worthwhile spending the time to wrap the consent token or
forward chained received headers stuff into an ID?
--
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.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg