Bill Weinman wrote:
At 10:02 PM 9/28/2003, Phil Miller wrote:
Major nitpick: "roll" is a kind of bread; you mean "role".
Sheeesh! It's also a popular delivery mechanism for toilet paper.
That's embarrassing. The first fix is in place for -02. Thanks.
Now, for my real beef: the DNS requirements break the use of
'residential' ISP lines for hosting AMTP servers.
This needs to go in the FAQ. It's by far the most common objection.
...
Hi Bill,
First of all, thanks for keeping us updated on the progress of your
proposal. I would like to point out that we have two documents, the
requirements document
(http://www.infobro.com/anon-FTP/infoSource/IRTF/ASRG/draft-irtf-asrg-requirements-xx-05.txt)
and the technical considerations document
(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crocker-spam-techconsider-02.txt)
which both include an list of evaluation guidelines. It would be great
if you can run your proposal past those two checklists, and include the
results inside the main draft instead of the separate FAQ. This way we
can evaluate the impact of the proposal easier and can have the
information in the document itself, instead of a separate FAQ.
Second, I would like to ask if you can clarify for us whether your
proposal seeks to replace SMTP completely. Section 3 of your draft says:
" AMTP inherits the specification of SMTP and builds upon it. This
document specifies only the changes to SMTP and therefore implicitly
incorporates the most recent SMTP specification [RFC2821] except
where indicated."
If this is true, then I would like you to address the following
objections from the technical considerations document:
" The idea of replacing SMTP is appealing because it
permits thinking in terms of creating an infrastructure
that has accountability and restrictions built in.
Unfortunately an installed base the size of the
Internet is not likely to make such a change anytime
soon. It seems far more likely that successful spam
control mechanisms will be introduced as increments to
the existing Internet mail service.
"
In particular we would like to consider whether it would be more viable
to reformulate your protocol as an ESMTP extension rather than a
replacement for SMTP.
Yakov
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg