[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SMTP Transferred-By-Reference

2007-11-15 13:53:33
(re-adding ietf-smtp, it appeared to get bcc:ed so 'reply' didnt see it..)

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:20:48 EST, "David F. Skoll" said:

Douglas Otis wrote:

To support this effort, the TBR Extension offers a low overhead
means to defer a formal obligation to deliver, while also avoiding
the exchange of undesired data.

You still haven't explained this:  What's in it for the sender?
Why would an e-mail sender be interested in deferring the receiving SMTP
server's obligation to deliver?  As an e-mail sender, I want the e-mail
out of my hair as soon as possible!  I don't want to have to hang on to it!

And since ultimately the sender chooses whether or not to use TBR, you
have to explain...

     What's in it for the sender?

Even *more* important - what's in it for the sender *and* is a *disincentive*
to nefarious-minded senders?  Remember that spammers were among the *first*
to deploy SPF (yes, I *know* that case is an abuse of the difference between
what SPF *really* is and what most people *think* it is - but that's exactly
the space that spammers live in: abusing the corner cases). 

Attachment: pgp3PQR4hkTSj.pgp
Description: PGP signature