ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] About that e-postage draft [POSTAGE]

2009-02-11 17:46:00
Douglas Otis <dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org> wrote:
On Feb 10, 2009, at 7:09 PM, John Leslie wrote:

As far as "deployment" plans, that seems premature; but I could  
respond to specific questions about how it might deploy. (Keep in  
mind that mass-email isn't all spam, and there are quite a few mass- 
emailers that currently pay "vouching" services to improve their  
delivery rates.)

It would seem any e-postage system requires international arrangements  
similar to what now accommodates the exchange of physical mail.

   Actually, no: the arrangements are "inter-bank" not international.

   (There is the question of currency exchange rates, but banks do
that today.)

   Also, "bank" deserves to be in quotation marks, since there's no
essential advantage to having postage-issuing "banks" regulated by
national governments. (Only settlements between banks would be
visible, and presumably regulated.)

Perhaps some type of random number exchange and cancelation process  
may involve the IETF.  Making random numbers the size of IPv6 might  
allow routers to sort validations and cancelations for a new type of  
postal router.

   Not sure I see your point... ePostage-Banks issue postage, and the
same bank redeems it unless there's an agreement between "banks".
I see no role for IETF in designing such "inter-bank" agreements.

The next question might be how would countries be compensated for the  
dispersal of e-postage tokens, and their collection of fees?

   "Banks" would be compensated by debiting a customer account more
than the amount of ePostage issued and/or crediting a customer
account less than the amount redeemed. Or, perhaps there would be a
per-transaction fee (in the thousandths of cents, presumably). I
see no role for IETF in saying which model a "bank" uses.

   (It's even conceivable that each major email receiver might issue
its own ePostage instead of going through a "bank", and hide the
"banking" charges entirely.)

The token itself should encode the country of origin.

   Encode the _issuer_, yes. There might be an IETF role in saying
how to encode it.

Perhaps e-postage could be priced at one-tenth the price of
international first-class stamps.

   Clearly there are some mass-emailers that would pay that; but I
expect the actual amount to settle on a much smaller number. That's
a research issue. ;^)

How can discount e-postage be prevented, since there would be  
a profit motive to cheat?

   What do you mean, "cheat"? The receiver says what's acceptable,
and cries "TILT" if s/he doesn't get it.

   I do expect _any_ "standard" ePostage amount to be undercut by
some receivers: left to myself I'd skip the step of setting a
"standard" amount.

Perhaps this could be seen as a charity for third-world countries
that have the cheapest stamps.

   I do expect some receivers to choose to accept charity-issued
stamps. It will appeal to some folks' sensibilities. :^)

--
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg