I just had a look at Zoemail.
To quote this page
<https://www.smallbusinesscomputing.com/biztools/article.php/3347011/ZoEmail-Has-Zero-Tolerance-for-Spam.htm>
Your ZoEmail address is ultimately different for each person who sends you
mail.
It consists of a conventional user ID and domain name, with the ZoEmail
key, an alpha-numeric string, wedged in before the @ sign — eg.
gerryblackwell(_dot_)rcu99llp(_at_)zoemail(_dot_)com, "rcu99llp" being the
key.
The system automatically assigns randomly generated keys to legitimate
correspondents and stores them in a look-up table. If an incoming message
does not include a valid key, the system discards it, assuming it's spam.
In my opinion, the reason they were failed is because they were trying to
use the disposable email address feature for human-to-human mails. An email
address should be easy to give. It should be a single identity for
human-to-human mails. e.g. john(_at_)example(_dot_)com. It should be easily
fillable
in an offline form.
In my system we are isolating only the website related mails.
human-to-human mails gonna work as usual.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:37 AM John R Levine <johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com>
wrote:
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote:
Seem like I have already disclosed that patent in my IDS
<https://www.dropbox.com/s/bczz1ccw5xj9k4w/ids.pdf?dl=0>.
That's fine, but your scheme still seems a lot like Zoemail.
Zoemail was invented over 20 years ago and although it worked technically,
it was a complete failure as a mail system that people actually used.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
--
Best Regards,
Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
Dombox, Inc.
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp