ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: spam

2003-05-27 14:05:22
Paul,

Paul Vixie wrote:
[large snap]
my own ideas have to do with trustbrokers, certificates for both
mailboxes and transfer/relay agents, and provable confidence in
subjective values. but maybe all that's just crap, and what's
actually necessary and sufficient would have a completely
different look/feel to it than anything i've yet considered.

I'm with you here, but keep reading.


we (the e-mail producing/consuming community) have the
technology, we have the collective wit and wisdom, we have the
proven commercial value of the service.  what we lack, dear
ietf, is simply: leadership.

Given what you wrote just above (which I agree with), what is your
assessment that a system such as what you have in mind would
successfully reach IETF consensus?

Look just the past 2 days how many trolls posted on this ML to lobby for
the spammer's cause.

The reason I agree with Noel along the lines that the only way is making
spammers pay for sending email is not because I don't think that we
don't have what it takes to invent a protocol, but because I think it
will be torpedoed before it is born.

Michel.




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