On April 22, 2004 at 08:57 research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com (Yakov
Shafranovich) wrote:
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.
Why would anyone do rate-limiting so long as they can entice customers
by offering them unlimited, free access to YOUR mailbox?
It's beginning to install a charging mechanism and charges which will
impose realistic rate-limiting.
But a good first step would be creating mechanisms whereby everyone
(well, at least ISPs or sizeable corps etc) can easily know what the
situation is in cold, hard, numbers.
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.
Because money talks and bullshit walks, Yakov, in as few words as is
probably possible.
We may not move it all to an idealized charging/settlement system in
one fell swoop.
But we can begin to move down that road by thinking about resource
accountability and mechanism to help with that.
Hell, you can do other things with the numbers, that's one underlying
confusion, mechanism versus policy.
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs(_at_)TheWorld(_dot_)com |
http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
The World | Public Access Internet | Since 1989 *oo*
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg