ietf-smtp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Has the IETF dropped the ball?

2005-03-09 10:53:28


----- Original Message -----
From: "Russ Allbery" <rra(_at_)stanford(_dot_)edu>
To: <ietf-smtp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: Has the IETF dropped the ball?


Yes, people are frustrated, but there is little correlation between how
frustrated people are and how easy the problem is to solve.

Good points.

I hate to be accused of over simplifying problems and its solutions. Maybe
that comes with years of integrated experiences.

Yes, the "Spam issue" is subjective in its definition but I believe it can
be broken down to its most basic elements.

First, as far as SMTP concern, we need to remove (keep) the mail
interpretation concepts out of the picture. This is one area where is much
confusion is blocking a solution.  It needs to be taken out of the first
level of security considerations because its a subjective concept.

Second, we need to focus on the most prevalent fact we have:

     By far, by industry measurements,  60-80% of all transactions
    are non-SMTP compliant.

Therefore, using any form of mathematics, physics and/or logic,  it should
go without saying that a great benefit is theorically achievable at the SMTP
level
simply by enforcing SMTP compliancy.

The obvious general consensus is that we want a solution without breaking
the current infrastructure.  Its an practical goal to reach in lieu of
considering the ideal goal.  But the R&D needs to be done for the ideal
solution first before we can even achieve a practical compromise.   We throw
a lot of good ideas out and limit the practical implementations.

We have a lot of good ideas out there, but there all suffer with the same
realization:

    "What to do about the legacy and/or non-compliant transaction?"

Sincerely,

Hector Santos, CTO
Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
305-431-2846 Cell
305-248-3204 Office