The idea behind this concept is to not modify current software, but provide
additional stand-alone software that provides sender accountability. RMX
requires a modification to DNS to allow for the match between the sending IP
address and the 'reply to' server IP address. I feel adoption of an added
piece of software is more likely to occur in a shorter period of time than
by substantially modifying existing MTA or DNS software. That doesn't rule
out the more efficient methods, like RMX, being adopted as a long-term
solution.
Basically, the intent is for this method to be completely transparent to the
users and therefore have no impact on web-mail services. I am familiar with
my web-mail services using Ipswitch mail server software, but there may be
other issues that you are alluding to that I may not be aware of.
I also understand that there are network utilization issues with the added
messages, but if sender accountability occurs we will see a significant drop
in overall usage by reducing SPAM. As well, the intent is to make these
additional validation messages as small as possible.
Howard Roth
The NetTech Group, Inc.
11 Airport Blvd., Suite 200
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Phone - 650-871-7209
Fax - 650-871-7219
Email - hroth(_at_)tngi(_dot_)com
-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]On
Behalf Of Kee
Hinckley
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 5:28 PM
To: hroth(_at_)tngi(_dot_)com
Cc: 'Asrg(_at_)Ietf(_dot_) Org'
Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2 - Solving Spam By Establishing A Platform For Sender
Accountability
At 11:27 AM -0700 6/27/03, Howard Roth wrote:
Overview of Email Sender Validation Effort to reduce SPAM:
Efforts to validate the sender of an email message will help reduce
the dissemination of unwanted email. We propose a specific
methodology to address this issue by using a simple method based on
a process that responds to a new message with specially coded
request for validation message. This specially coded message is
sent to the "reply to" address. The message initiating mail server
receives this reply and responds with an acknowledgement to the
In what way is this any functionally any different than RMX or other
similar server-is-authorized-to-send-mail protocols? Unlike those,
this requires maintaining state and uses a heavyweight protocol. It
does have the advantage of not requiring a live internet server to do
verification. But it has the disadvantage of requiring millions of
people to change how they send email (most especially users of
web-mail services).
--
Kee Hinckley
http://www.messagefire.com/ Anti-Spam Service for your POP Account
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg