On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 07:59:29PM -0800, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote
MAPS was undercapitalized for the role they wanted to play and they
got cocky. They were finished once they started talking about
'collateral damage'.
Let's be grateful that it was a multi-billion dollar giant like AOL
that Sanford Wallace chose to sue, and establish favourable case-law for
the anti-spam side.
If technical solutions do succeed in stopping spam, mark my word, you
*WILL* see "must carry" legislation for "legitimate marketing email".
So? If we have good domain based authentication much better for the MTA
to accept any mail that is authenticated and allow the MUA to perform
filtering on the basis of domain owner reputation.
What use is a MUA-based filter when your 10-megabyte inbox is
rejecting inbound email because you're over quota ?
I don't want my ISP making arbitrary decisions about what mail I
receive, I want to make those decisions myself, although I will
probably use third party info to do so.
But what about the 95% of end-users who don't understand CIDRs, how to
invoke DNSbls in their filters, and end up begging their ISPs to do
whatever is necessary to stop the flow of spam to their inboxes ? Why
shouln't they be allowed the *CHOICE* of outsourcing their spam-blocking?
--
Walter Dnes <waltdnes(_at_)waltdnes(_dot_)org>
Email users are divided into two classes;
1) Those who have effective spam-blocking
2) Those who wish they did
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg