Paul Vixie <vixie(_at_)vix(_dot_)com> wrote:
the principle i've always followed is that
"all communications must be by mutual consent"
...
Excellent principle, Paul. I'd like to put it at the head of the
list.
I've also gleaned (mostly from this list over the last week):
Ed Gerck <egerck(_at_)nma(_dot_)com> wrote:
The spam problem starts with *freely* accepting mail from strangers.
"Tom Petch" <nwnetworks(_at_)dial(_dot_)pipex(_dot_)com> wrote:
Spam is and will remain a long-term battleground and it needs serious
effort to counter.
Vernon Schryver <vjs(_at_)calcite(_dot_)rhyolite(_dot_)com> wrote:
Every mail message carries a practically unforgeable (for spammers)
token identifying its source. That token is the IP address of the
SMTP client.
"Robert G. Brown" <rgb(_at_)phy(_dot_)duke(_dot_)edu> wrote:
it is pointless to erect some expensive Maginot Line and pretend it
will solve the problem.
Vernon Schryver <vjs(_at_)calcite(_dot_)rhyolite(_dot_)com> wrote:
There is no and can never be a hoop that is low enough to pass
enough human strangers but exclude spammers' computers.
Senator Gordon Humprey said:
If you want more of something, subsidize it; if you want less, tax it.
Ed Gerck <egerck(_at_)nma(_dot_)com> wrote:
Spammers need scale (because they get a very low return). Therefore,
part of the solution should be to deny scalability to spammers.
Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch(_at_)muada(_dot_)com> wrote:
If we can communicate the fact that a message is discarded because
it was categorized as spam back to the sender without adverse side
effects, then occasional false positives aren't much of a problem.
Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch(_at_)muada(_dot_)com> wrote:
If you reject the message during the SMTP session you don't need to
generate a bounce message, the other side will do this.
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net> wrote:
Errors returned after the close of the SMTP transaction are likely
to go to (and confuse) an innocent party; thus such errors should
be deprecated for any email identified as spam.
====
Not a bad start, IMHO. :^)
Additions are welcome; corrections by the authors are welcome;
suggestions for re-wording are acceptable...
--
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>