I suspect that many of the participants of this list use and manage email
in a way that
is very different than the way that the average Joe does.
Professionally and with expertise you mean?
Ergo the flaws in my system (such as graphical support) may be
absolutely intolerable to the people involved with the
ASRG but these same flaws may be trivial to the average Joe.
But surely it is the professionals and the experts whom you wish to
convince of your proposal's
efficacy and desirability? Why else have you asked them to criticise your
proposal?
It seems to me that you hope to achieve the approval of this group but are
not prepared to
compromise your pet project in response to well informed, well intentioned
and cogent points
raised against it.
If you are only interested in appealing to the average Joe I suggest you
seek your approval
elsewhere, where you may receive a less honest and more acceptable
palliative review.
Eliminating spam for most, if not all people, would be an accomplishment.
No doubt. However I'm quite sure that mail administrators in ISP's and
corporations the world over
would look in dismay at cost of accomodating the use of a system which
requires that an outgoing
message be sent for every unwanted incoming message.
There is still some concern that the bounces will "spam" innocent people.
If we arbitrarily guess
Ah yes, a good solid "arbitrary guess"
that 1 out of 50 forged spam return addresses represents a real active
account,
and if we assume that bounces will only be sent back to 5% of spams after
filtering,
then we would have a 'bounce spam' problem that is only 1/1000th the size
of the spam
that is being sent out.
Of course this is an "arbitrary guess" and does not represent anything like
the real world.
What about those virii which send mail floods with real addresses? I seem
to recall several occasions when
these floods resulted in real headaches for sysadmins trying to cope with
the bounces.
This is not even taking into account the ease with which a bounce can be
prevented from reaching a user if that user had not sent out the
corresponding email.
Preventing its receipt is one thing, preventing its transport is quite
another.
I do not believe that this will be the flaw that sinks this system.
Perhaps not, but don't underestimate the intelligence of the people who
will be required to make the
commercial decision to adopt your proposal.
d.
***************************************************************************
The information in this e-mail is confidential and for use by the addressee(s)
only. If you are not the intended recipient (or responsible for delivery of the
message to the intended recipient) please notify us immediately on 0141 306
2050 and delete the message from your computer. You may not copy or forward it
or use or disclose its contents to any other person. As Internet communications
are capable of data corruption Student Loans Company Limited does not accept
any responsibility for changes made to this message after it was sent. For
this reason it may be inappropriate to rely on advice or opinions contained in
an e-mail without obtaining written confirmation of it. Neither Student Loans
Company Limited or the sender accepts any liability or responsibility for
viruses as it is your responsibility to scan attachments (if any). Opinions and
views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and may not reflect the
opinions and views of The Student Loans Company Limi!
ted.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the
presence of computer viruses.
**************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg