[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard

2004-01-30 10:28:42
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 06:15:11 PST, Carl Malamud said:

1. The fact that esmtp had no way for the receiver to indicate
that they don't want to be solicited.

2. The fact that our mail headers are being littered with
insertions by filtering software and, increasingly with obscure
markings like "ADV" required by policy makers.

I'm still puzzled by what problem we actually expect this to solve.

Is there a significant number of spammers that would actually take the
time to look for a No Soliciting marker, and actually abide by it?

Reading Section 3, there's a lot of uses of "reputable mailers", when
that's not the problem....

(Don't take the "We could pass a law banning the attempted bypass of
said banners" - given the number of spam that are outright fraud and
the lack of progress in enforcing existing laws, I don't see that as
being a useful direction.  So unless there's something more substantial
than "this time it will be different, I promise", a new law won't help).

Attachment: pgpZPIKiZvmJ2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>