Re: [Asrg] Unique innovations made to anti-spam system

On 2006-01-23 13:37:25 -0800, Douglas Otis wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > On 2006-01-23 11:41:56 -0800, Douglas Otis wrote:
> > > BATV, much like VERP, offers a solution for preventing any "back- 
> > > scatter" problem from affecting the users.
> > Yes, but it has to implemented by the sender. If I implement it, I  
> > will get less (or even no) backscatter, but it won't reduce the  
> > amount of "real" spam I get.
> This comment was limited to your conclusion that DKIM or SPF solves  
> the back-scatter problem.
I didn't claim that they solve the problem by themselves. I suggested
that anyone implementing the auto-ack scheme should include a way for
third parties to protect themselves from getting backscatter. SPF and
DKIM were merely examples - I mentioned them because they have already
seen some deployment. Additionally, publishing a "v=spf ~all" record is
almost no effort and shouldn't have any negative consequences (except
that your peers might doubt your sanity).

And, as I said, I DON'T LIKE THIS SCHEME and I do not recommend that
anybody should implement it. I merely offered a suggestion which might
turn a very bad idea into merely a bad idea. 

BATV solves the the problem of backscatter. No adaptation of the
auto-ack scheme required. However, this means that the deployer of the
auto-ack scheme expects everybody else to implement batv, which is rude
at best.

        hp

-- 
   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | Ich sehe nun ein, dass Computer wenig
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR       | geeignet sind, um sich was zu merken.
| |   | hjp(_at_)hjp(_dot_)at         |
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ |    -- Holger Lembke in dan-am

pgpGusHLJRsEr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg