On 1/24/07, william(at)elan.net <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, David Nicol wrote:
> On 1/24/07, Eric A. Hall <ehall(_at_)ehsco(_dot_)com> wrote:
>> either. I imagine somebody would need to implement it in their MTA before
>> it advanced down the standardization track.
>
> the DATAFIRST proposal I made on this mailing list (june 2006) performs the
> same functions, semanticly, with less intermediate data and shorter times
Is what you're asking really HEADer data first or entier message data
content first?
Even if, what would benefit "me" at the moment and for the foreseeable
future is having more capability to "drop connections" before they start
sending - based on recipient, then source. If I can shut down the millions
of incorrigable LDAP, DNS, and I/O operations that take place to accept,
review, then reject inbound spam, I'd be in the black operationally.
If I had to pick a technology priority to pique my interest for '07,
that I would
consider proposing as a spending item to "make mail better", it would
be centered around IP reputation.
-M<
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg