Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-bounces(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
[mailto:asrg-bounces(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Chris Lewis
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 10:37 AM
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF
Subject: [Asrg] RFC5451 Re: who gets the report, was We really don't
need
Could we not do this by extending 5451 semantics to have a "where to
complain to" cause?
That might work, if there's a reliable way to get that information and relay it
to MUAs.
It's a header in the email, so, and I think most thick clients (suitable
for implementing the sending of a report) will already have it.
Webmails, for example, would implement it server-end not (directly) in
the browser.
Are you talking about an internal destination for spam reports (e.g. your IT
group), or an external one (e.g. abuse(_at_)domain)?
Either. If you have an AR header you trust, there's no reason to refuse
it giving you an external destination. Question is, how do we tell it's
trusted, or do we care (especially with a site that's not 5451 aware)?
If we pitch it towards RFC5451-aware sites, and they pre-strip all
non-locally originated AR headers (as permitted by RFC5451), there's no
issue. Are the sites that won't be a big enough concern? Dunno.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg