Yakov Shafranovich wrote:
[snip earlier context because it's no longer relevant]
What I am trying to say is that if the whole intent of e-postage is to
do rate-limiting, then just do rate limiting and skip the e-postage.
The purpose of E-postage, as I see such proposals, is to make the cost of
indiscriminate spamming prohibitive. This does inherently rate-limit, but
the intent is that spammers' customers won't see anything close to the
current ROI of spamming.
Otherwise, I do not see what the ASRG or the IETF can do for or
against e-postage - it is simply not within the scope of standards at
this point.
Well, it might be useful to set out some requirements. Or is that not
within the IETF's remit? (Serious question.)
It is more of an IRTF issue at this point, so if sufficient people want
to pursue discussion on it, we can spill it off into a separate ASRG list.
I think it would be good to establish a separate list for discussion of this
nature. There are many people with fine ideas, and it would help to collect
them in a list which doesn't have have the denizens screaming that e-postage
is evil.
However, what I am really interest in seeing about e-postage is
discussion on how it can stop spam. Perhaps we can look into why people
think that e-postage will stop spam and carry over those principles into
other proposals. I want to isolate the principles of why e-postage will
help from the actual technical problems involved with making e-postage
work such double-spending.
As I said above, e-postage removes the economic incentives to spam. I really
think that further discussion on the general list is not too productive.
Philip Miller
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg