On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 11:27:15 +0530, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan said:
You are talking about bulk mailing here. Our "injection" phase is not
designed for bulk mails. That's why we throw this warning when the user
enabled restricted mode.
So how does your system classify this email you're reading right now?
Is it spam, or bulk mail, or something the user wanted?
I want them to create an isolated mail address which would look like
ietf(_dot_)org(_at_)test123(_dot_)example(_dot_)com and then give this
address while signing up to
ietf mailing list.
That breaks one of the big advantages of having a fixed address -
recognizability
by others. The address I'm using in this email has been in use for at least 2
decades
now, and allows others to tell that the "me" posting on this list is the same
"me" posting
to a Linux mailing list.
That's why '+' addressing was invented.
A few user experience issues:
1) Many users will *not* think to create a new address for each mailing list
before they subscribe.
1a) Sometimes, it's not directly under the user's control. For example, I end
up using the same address for email from Scouting USA National, and from my
local troop (because the troop roster is fed from National's records..)
2) You need to Do The Right Thing if somebody you've never interacted with does
an off-list reply to a post to a list.
3) If you want your scheme to work in the real world, it needs to play nice
with browser form autofill.
So... is there actually an architecture or proposal in that 300 page document,
or is it just a cargo-cult collection of things that people have used in the
past, to varying levels of success?
And are there any production workload numbers showing that it (a) scales and
(b) actually gets anywhere closer to "Zero" spam than most providers are
already managing?
pgpxgbqJJzL3p.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp