I don't believe that this adds up to what you claim.
There was some more fundamental (but probably premature)
discussion of "consent" early in the life this group.
The charter goes on and on about consent, however aside from Gordon's
HTML
blocking thread, there has been no discussion of that.
You might be interested in the threads starting with
<E18r0iB-0000Ci-00(_at_)mail(_dot_)nitros9(_dot_)org> "[Asrg] The Consent
4-Tuple"
and
<E18sKmk-00009r-00(_at_)argon(_dot_)connect(_dot_)org(_dot_)uk> "[Asrg] What
would consent look
like?"
If discussion of
consent is premature at the moment,
I meant premature at the time. People were busy contributing their pet
silver bullets. I thought this would have stopped by now.
Shows how much I know... :-)
what should we be looking at right
now?
In general, what directions should the group be pursuing at the moment?
I strongly believe that you are right, that an analysis of the consent
problem is important. I believe that one can get to a general framework for
anti-spam systems from first principles.
I think it tends to something like:
message classifier function
+ expression of recipient policy (consent expression)
+ policy enforcement agent
--
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg