-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
gep2(_at_)terabites(_dot_)com wrote:
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 21:43:58 -0600
"Al Iverson" <aliversonchicagolists(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
I grant it's not always the most granular identifier.
Absolutely. It is SUCH a blunt instrument that I firmly believe it is
TECHNICALLY IRRESPONSIBLE for any intelligent person to propose basing
almost any kind of spam control scheme upon it.
Sorry, the industry has already decided that issue. The fact that so
much of your customer's email was blocked by administrators explicitly
making the choice to use IP-based filtering means that this genie CANNOT
be put back in the bottle.
You need to live with it. Hence, the BCP effort to make it at least
minimally consistent/predictable.
Ranting and railing against a technology that so much of the industry
has decided to embrace is pointless.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
iQCVAwUBRemgEJ3FmCyJjHfhAQKDaAQAqkZlv7bst54fDgrtDoNGC6EWMskSKLoa
WdDojxSCDPTWtZX1YXRyZCclc7/+gGzuS3zMrqu1kELOI+vzaWiW7LJ+JttefI45
tBCWgIokSi7NyA2i+R98c6IYCoONDi5eaJItYn46aVXU0wWKIV3TAtqDvnXFARXb
nqNbIVHZ11o=
=iFcc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg