[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Bounce/System Notification Address Verification

2005-06-28 08:20:06

----- Original Message -----
From: <Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu>
To: "Hector Santos" <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com>

OK, let's throw out support for HELO, because the majority of good systems
do EHLO.  And throw out 8BITMIME support, only spamming pacific rim sites
use that in my experience.  Oh, and there' this other feature...

Equating "The majority don't do that" with "nobody should do that and it
shouldn't be supported" for a feature that has demonstrable usefulness is
Bad Idea.

I don't believe I implied any of the above, but since you brought it up ...

Isn't that how the IETF works - by consensus?  which today, forgive me if I
am wrong, just expressing what seems to be happening,  isn't really a
majority but rather a few veteran cogs moving to private discussion areas to
define what is in their view the best interest of the world.   Absolutely
nothing wrong with that!  I generally have full faith in experienced people,
and typically I feel common sense prevails.

Now, in regards to the "SPAM PROBLEM."

Do the math: Over 60-80% of all transactions are problematics.  Microsoft
says its over 90%.  We see a 94% rate. YMMV, but there is absolutely no
dispute here of the high volume of non-compliant SMTP transactions.

The spam problem exist primarily because the SMTP process is 100% exploited
in every which way possible  No need to go into details, but it all begins
with its relaxed provisions.You are a smart guy. I don't think I need to go
futher.  Just do the math.

Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.

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