From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]
On
Behalf Of Barry Shein
Sent: July 7, 2003 20:09
To: Elric Pedder
Cc: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [Asrg] 3. Requirements - Non Spam must go through
On July 7, 2003 at 19:23 elric(_at_)novitraq(_dot_)com (Elric Pedder) wrote:
> "Any measure for stopping spam must ensure that all messages
> either reach the intended recipient, or are returned to the
> sender, or the sender notified."
Yeah, I'm sure Ralsky et al will thank everyone for the help.
This really only makes sense when we again think of spam like an
individual sending a msg which one may or may not want.
I agree, but unfortunately the anti-spam system cannot distinguish
those cases.
Howsabout when it's 200+ hijacked servers banging at you full-speed
with the same spam? That's the reality.
Ideally the notification would be issued by the servers themselves
as a result of a 5xx response code during the SMTP transaction.
This may help the 200+ hijacked servers' administrators notice the
problem.
It may be a costly process, but you are only returning one
notification for each message.
I don't think we can expect users to monitor their SPAM traps,
and even if they did we would not have achieved much more than
convenient folder management. Unwanted mail may be a nuisance,
but missing wanted mail is unacceptable. The result would be
that users lose faith in e-mail itself, which I believe is too
costly an outcome. What will we have achieved if e-mail
becomes perceived as an unreliable medium and users have to
phone the recipient to see if the message has been deleted.
Is the proposal to send the hundreds of msgs per minute each a proper
handwritten no thank you note?
I think a DSN would be sufficient, but if handwritten notes are the
policy at your MTA then that's fine too.
--
Elric Pedder
Mailtraq Development (www.mailtraq.com)
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg