What exactly is the specific failing of SMTP which is addressed by pull
systems?
Have I missed something?
yes you have
pull forces the id of the remote server *without* rewriting the entire mail
transport system
it can be implemented gradually
i.e. mail from non pull servers are given a grace period (1-2yrs?)
after that point all non pull mail is returned with an error message
most important....
PULL DOES NOT DECIDE WHAT IS OR WHAT ISN'T SPAM.
only the receiver is in the position to do that.
thats why I recommend a "class" system be instantiated at the same time (as
pull or whatever ID system)
so the user can set rules something like
"deny all messages from unknown"
"deny class::UCE"
"accept class::UCE::hardware::electrical_tools"
"accept class::personal"
(examples only)
this is my legal + technical argument
both must co-exist to get a spam *reduction* system working
there will never be a spam prevention system
because spam cannot be defined!
Regards
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]On Behalf Of Jon
Kyme
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 10:46 PM
To: Dag Kihlman
Cc: ASRG
Subject: [Asrg] Re: 6. Proposals - Pull System (revisited)
What exactly is the specific failing of SMTP which is addressed by pull
systems?
Have I missed something?
--
_______________________________________________
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