Hi again,
In fact to reply to my own message, and distill my thoughts somewhat, I think
it is valid to define unwanted email (and so Spam) as "email which is destined
to be deleted by the intended recipient unread"
Using this definition in place of "spam" we can say the following, which I
believe is a fair precis of the main thrust of the issue, and hence validates
this definition..
The problem of spam can be defined as one of scale, simply put the quantity of
"email which is destined to be deleted by the intended recipient unread" is a
significant drain on the resources of transport, user account providers, and
individual mail clients.
It is a problem for users as a large quantity of "email which is destined to be
deleted by the intended recipient unread" can obscure legitimate traffic.
A sucesful widespread strategy will depend largely upon the widespread
identification of "email which is destined to be deleted by the intended
recipient unread" as near to it's source as is possible, perferably at the
first outbound gateway, ideally early in (or even before)the transport protocol
process, thus preventing it from traveling further downstream consuming
resources.
The current de-facto solution includes many distinct parts from the
identification and rejection of "email which is destined to be deleted by the
intended recipient unread" by MTA's through to personalised filtering of "email
which is destined to be deleted by the intended recipient unread" on user
accounts and in email client software.
d.
-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]On Behalf Of Danny
Angus
Sent: 06 June 2003 11:28
To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: *Possible Spam *RE: [Asrg] criteria for spam V2
Hi,
Sorry to chip in but I can't help it, this discussion about the
meaning of words is strangely compelling!
Here goes my 2c..
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg