On 8/18/09 10:17 AM, Chris Lewis wrote:
Bill Cole wrote:
I don't see how this reduces the effort required on the receiving side in
comparison to currently common practices.
Precisely - in fact, it increases the work the receiver has to do,
probably substantially.
As accepted IP addresses are reduced, there will be increased abuse of
existing services, that were likely exposed through information gleaned
from compromised computers. This will eventually move the problem to
the point where the IP address of the client offers fewer clues about a
message source. Without some simply means to identify undesired
messages, the sheer volume of undesired email will provide a growing
burden. Especially when content filtering must be deployed. It is hard
to imagine a more resource intensive strategy.
Consider: the offer/callback approach is identical to SMTP up to the
DATA keyword.
Not if MUA or specialized MDAs gather the messages marked as desired. A
selection based upon the offers should reduce the overhead considerably.
The "offer" would have to have more-or-less the same information as the
pre-DATA SMTP information in normal SMTP.
No. Unlike that of an SMTP exchange, when reference information is not
valid, the reference does not work. This removes the validation steps.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg