Mark E. Mallett wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 07:23:32AM -0800, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
A couple of random remarks from a very cursory reading:
There is no difficulty in ensuring that accreditation providers are
accountable to email recipients. An accreditation authority that
provides incorrect accreditation will soon be ignored.
Pretty bold assertion :-)
It hasn't held true with some DNSBL services. Among other reasons is
the wide variety of definitions of "incorrect," as well as extremely
polar opinions about listing criteria, remedies, responsibility, et al.
The key difference from blacklists is that blacklists do not ask ISPs
whether they want to be listed. Here, the sender actively goes to a
provider and signs up, and then indicates his accredidation in some
protocol.
My issue with this is something else - if all of this becomes prevalent
enough, aren't we essentially raising a barrier of entry for new domains
on the Internet? Doesn't such accredidation service essentially become a
gatekeeper for the Internet?
Yes, I read Microsoft's proposals about different types of tricks for
different domains, for example hash cash-type puzzles for smaller
domains in lieu of accreditation. I am still not convinced that a given
ISP will bother with supporting both accreditation and hash cash, they
just might take the easy way out and only support accreditation services.
Yakov
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg