ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Asrg] 3. Requirements - Non Spam must go through

2003-07-20 11:47:10
I agree too, that it is not a requirement.  This level of precision was not a 
requirement in the current draft either of course, it is a quote from an 
article not the draft requirements.  (BTW, I am trying to catch up so I know 
this is probably way out of scope by now).

-e

On Thursday, July 10, 2003 9:40 AM, Pete McNeil 
[SMTP:madscientist(_at_)microneil(_dot_)com] wrote:
I think you are correct.

For my opinion, it cannot be a requirement because the definition of
spam and non-spam is inconsistent, and because no mechanism for
determining this is perfect.

No doubt that it should be a _goal_ however.

_M

-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] 
On
Behalf Of Yakov Shafranovich
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 12:43 AM
To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3. Requirements - Non Spam must go through


Going back to the original question
(https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current
/msg06391.html):

"Any measure for stopping spam must ensure that all non-spam
messages reach
their intended recipients."

Am I correct in assuming that the overall opinion of the group
seems to be
that this statement cannot be part of the requirements?


_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg