[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] IETF Policy on dogfood consumption or avoidance - SMTP version

2019-12-26 05:46:33
Paul Smith writes:

In essence, I actually think we're moving towards that anyway, with the big email providers (gmail, Microsoft) essentially becoming their own ecosystem which includes a form of "authorisation" and with spam DNS RBLs/whitelisting orgs doing stuff. But, at the moment it's happening with no form of open discussion and with no standardisation. Maybe accepting that it's happening and working together to get a good standardised system would be better than pretending it's not happening and having a disjointed mess?

I do not see this happening. Gmail and Microsoft still have their customers to answer to, whether they're paying or not. If they start spam-binning their customers' E-mails that do not originate from sources that they bless (with the blessing required in advance, via some form of registration), it's going to turn into a major dumpster fire very quickly.

Not to say that I don't see one of them trying something like that. But, the resulting crapstorm is inevitable, and the whole thing will get rolled back within 24 hours after hitting the news.

And, in any case, the high volume spam senders will easily register and authorize themselves, I see nothing that'll prevent that, and we'll be back to the current status quo.

I do not see any solution based on some central authority, sitting on a throne and giving mail senders an official blessing, as a workable solution. The problem with spam isn't the sender's identity. Never was. Never will be.

Attachment: pgpukvyFvdHl_.pgp
Description: PGP signature

ietf-smtp mailing list
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>