Hector Santos <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com> wrote:
I am currently looking at the CVS (and DNS and CSA) drafts.
Thank you. More eyeballs always help.
The negative is that acceditation server bureaus will be limited, at first,
and most likely exclusive to specific group of organizations or type of
systems.
I envision several different types of business _adding_ this service
at "no additional fee". The first type is the domain-name registrars.
They're already taking a per-domain-per year fee and already maintaining
DNS servers. This service will differentiate them; and the sufficiently
clueful ones will quickly see the business case to add it.
3. Query a chosen Accreditation Service for the EHLO domain name
(see Domain Name Accreditation (DNA) [ID-Marid-CSVDNA])
Based on what I am seeing in the market place, infopreneurs are making
these fee based systems.
Indeed: Right-Hand-Side Whitelists are fee-based right now. Their
business model limits their ability to market to the masses, so their
fees are high. I don't hope to see fees disappear entirely, but I do
expect "free with boxtop" levels of pricing for low-volume, well-behaved
domains.
(OTOH, the current business model, effectively charging postage for
any mass-email which bounces or generates complaints, will no doubt
continue for mass-emailers.)
... unless someone champions and puts up free DNA site, it seems the
CSV idea will be somewhat crippled which means it only be implemented
as part of a total suite of other transaction management technologies.
(I've already discussed the "free with boxtop" services which will
directly rate domains.)
The other side of the accreditation service is what we described as
"proxy" accreditation lookup (which mysteriously seems to have disappeared
from Section 5 of [DNA], though a hint still remains in Section 3). The
idea is that the procedure in Section 5 might be performed directly by
sites receiving a small amount of email; but for sites with a significant
volume of incoming email, these would be delegated to a proxy and performed
in the same manner but with results cached and reported separately --
possibly by a single UDP DNS query to the proxy.
Operating such a proxy would be as cheap as operating a web proxy;
and there would likely be the same informal (no money changing hands)
arrangements for sharing the workload.
(In either case, distribution of lists recommending weights to be
given to different direct-accreditation services would be out-of-band
and not worth charging for.)
In short, there will probably need to be more than a list of
acceditation sites to lookup to make it more effective for operators.
Agreed. The proxy accreditation-lookup process is needed.
I guess, if we implemented CVS with some initial supportive DNA sites, we
would be able to help promote this sites and even encourage membership.
But I do see a need to offer more than one site, if only because one site
is "less" expensive than the other.
I am confident that at least half a dozen registrars would offer the
direct-rating service.
RBL is one area of optimization I would like to improve upon as it
represents a high percentage of the total validation transaction time.
If you agree a list of acceditation sites is needed, then this needs to
be optimized as well.
Does the proxy-lookup service I described satisfy this concern?
--
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>