On Dec 21 2004, John Levine wrote:
Would it be accurate to say that ASRG is interested in Z-mail
prevention solutions where Z-mail is a label for some set of
messages, and Z-mail can be taken to be spam?
Not really. That still implies that there's a fixed set of mail
that ASRG is trying to stamp out. I presume you have looked at
the charter at http://www.irtf.org/charters/asrg.html.
The charter does emphasise that the ASRG is looking for well
specified problems, and makes it clear that a multitude of
techniques to tackle them is desirable. As such, doesn't that
encourage attempts to define spam?
The original message you responded to suggested a possible
definition, followed by a link to some protocol which takes
that definition as a basis. I guess I don't see what prompted
you to warn against attempting to define spam. Could you explain?
My position is that any anti-spam project has to identify the flavor
of spam that the project is attempting to address, but I don't expect
projects all to address the same thing.
I agree with that position. Perhaps I read too much into your comment.
--
Laird Breyer.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg