From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]
On
Behalf Of C. Wegrzyn
Sent: July 2, 2003 16:38
To: Barry Shein
Cc: gep2(_at_)terabites(_dot_)com; Yakov Shafranovich;
asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: 6. Solutions - Longterm - Replacing SMTP (Re:
[Asrg] Bogus reasoning)
I believe the only real alternative is for every ISP (and
this can be done I believe) to take on a per-email
transaction fee.
This proposal is made quite often, but I cannot see how it
would work.
SMTP does not require the participation of any ISP other than
for the transmission of packets. In order to levy a charge,
the ISP would have to monitor your traffic, detect SMTP
usage, detect actual e-mail delivery, and bill you for it.
What you create is an incentive for users to avoid the
detection of SMTP delivery -- a whole new problem.
Without getting in to the "big brother" concepts or using
some sort of "centralised register of authorised e-mail
delivery agents" perhaps ISPs could bill a higher rate for
port 25-destined traffic than other traffic, and require that
every SMTP transaction contain only one RCPT address.
Unfortunately port 25-destined traffic does not actually
cost any more than other-port-destined traffic. Therefore
in a competitive marketplace prices will be driven down to
cost+margin.
The only weapon I can think of against market competition is
the government. So... would you accept a government tax on
e-mail?
Ultimately, I just don't see how you could charge for e-mail.
--
Elric Pedder
Mailtraq Development (www.mailtraq.com)
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg