Re: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis
2003-07-06 08:45:35
At 03:08 PM 7/6/2003 +0000, Mark McCarron wrote:
....
From: Yakov Shafranovich <research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com>
To: "Mark McCarron"
<markmccarron_itt(_at_)hotmail(_dot_)com>,asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 00:02:05 -0400
At 03:47 AM 7/6/2003 +0000, Mark McCarron wrote:
...
4. Participate in defining the consent framework.
Mark's Response:
The consent framework will consist of white and black lists. There
will be no greylisting. A complete opt-out will be allowed by 'GIEIS'.
The group's consent framework is what we are currently working on.
Mark's Response:
With all the self-interested posts that appear here with inaccurate
information, a coherent consent framework is highly unlikely to develop.
We are chartered to created such framework
(http://www.irtf.org/charters/asrg.html) and a draft is available. If you
had been following the discussions for the last few days you would have
seen that they are concentrated on that framework. If you do not wish to
contribute to anything else than your own proposal, then create your own
mailing list for its discussion and leave the group. This is what the
author of the SPF proposal did.
Mark's Response:
I have been following the discussion for the last few days. Frankly, I
have never seen so much nonsense posted in such a short period of
time. The 'consent framework' is a few hours worth of work at most and
full of things that are already known or done, how long did it take the
group to develop this?? Since its creation???
Nevertheless its what we are chartered to do. If you think its a bunch of
non-sense then either start commenting on specific parts or LEAVE. We were
chartered by the IRTF to create it and that's what we are doing. The IMPP
WG also started with a model so its not an uncommon practice to start of
with an abstract model and then go on to specific solutions.
It is not in the financial interests of this group to develop a solution
as it would put the majority of posters and their associated firms
completely out of business. Thus, to anyone with any knowledge of the
subject, it is very clear when people run around in circles deliberatly to
prevent solutions from being developed. This is a daily occurance at the Asrg.
There are many people present in the group that do not have financial
interests involved. Do not draw conclusions.
Additionally, this is a technical forum not a Madison Avenue marketing
firm. We are not interested in your marketing materials, or promises of
salvation from porn and spam. We are looking at technical details only
and do not wish to be informed of "how many jobs" your proposal will
create or how much money it will make.
Mark's Response:
So, this is what you call a technical forum?? Hardly any of you could
understand the 'GIEIS' system until big daigrams appeared. Furthermore,
the issue lies solely at the SMTP protocol and the existing architecture
of the Internet. Nowhere else. It can never be fixed unless 'GIEIS' is
implemented.
We understood your proposal the first time. Its just that no one bothered
to analyze it until it got too annoying. IN YOUR OPINION, if the ultimate
solution for spam has already been developed (GIEIS) why bother having this
group? Why not disband the group and start implementing GIEIS? This group
wants to look at all the proposals not just yours, so why don't you create
a separate mailing list for your project while giving us the time to look
at everything else? Since we are "lost souls" already since we do not want
to accept GIEIS due to "conflicts of interest" why stay here? OR is it
because you want to gain the authority granted by the IRTF? The IRTF DOES
NOT HAVE POWER to develop standards, the IETF does. If you wish your system
to be standardized then write an Internet Draft and submit it to the RFC
Editor. Individuals have full power to do so without being affiliated with
specific groups.
The 'frameworks' and 'solutions' that have appeared in this forum defy
even common sense at times, let alone technical reasoning. If you want a
forum were businesses prevent the development of solutions, the the Asrg
is becoming very close to it. Almost everyone, including the current
chair, has open conflicts of interest in regards to the issue of spam.
There are over 800 people on the list, many of which have no connection to
spam and no conflicts. Do not draw conclusions from a small sample.
In the past, Internet architecture has been an open affair for all to
contribute too. Due to the large sums of money now involved this practice
will most likely be discontinued due to the conflicts of interest present.
Honestly, do you really think no one would notice that 99% of postings
made to this group are junk designed to keep the issue going??
Speak for yourself. Although this group has its problems, the IRTF and IAB
are aware of them, and trying to fix them.
-------
".... when suddenly a White Rabbit with pink eyes ran close by her .... but
when the Rabbit actually took a watch out of its waistcoat-pocket, and
looked at it, and then hurried on, Alice started to her feet, for it
flashed across her mind that she had never before seen a rabbit with either
a waistcoat-pocket, or a watch to take out of it, and burning with
curiosity, she ran across the field after it, and fortunately was just in
time to see it pop down a large rabbit-hole under the hedge. In another
moment down went Alice after it, never once considering how in the world
she was to get out again. The rabbit-hole went straight on like a tunnel
for some way, and then dipped suddenly down, so suddenly that Alice had not
a moment to think about stopping herself before she found herself falling
down a very deep well ....."
--------
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- RE: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, (continued)
- RE: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Yakov Shafranovich
- Re: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- RE: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- RE: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- Re: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis,
Yakov Shafranovich <=
- Re: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- Re: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- RE: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Mark McCarron
- RE: [Asrg] 6. Solutions - Replacing SMTP - GIEIS Analysis, Paul Judge
|
|
|