Hi,Dave Aronson,
(BTW, those two characters before the ! just show up as empty boxes
here.)
These words are in Chinese.
I\'m not good at E
I would certainly hope so. Otherwise it would be worse than useless.
Thankyou
And in the case we are concerned with, that of the spammer, what is to
prevent the sender smtp server from claiming zero percent chance? Or,
if the white-hats realize \"zero means it must be from a spammer\",
spammers could claim some random very low percentage.
A).
1.We must be sure the purpose of spammers making spam-pointer is they wish the
receivers download the email-content.
2.Where the receivers download is \"Email-content server\".
3.The authority database guarantee all \"Email-content servers\" are related
with legal ESPs.
4.legal ESPs don\'t wish their users be spammers
5.those spammer who making spam-pointer aren\'t belong to legal ESPs.
6.Their \"Email-content servers\" are illegal.
7.the receivers won\'t download the email-content from illegal servers.
B).
This tech can work together with \"SenderID\" to confirm the sender ID
C)
The spammer can create a lot of spam-pointer point to ONE email which is on a
legal server.
How to prevent it?
The legal \"Email-content servers\" provides \"retr\" and \"top\" command to
let users download the content.
\"retr\" can only be used once.
\"top\" can be used more than once.
\"retr\" is more popular than \"top\".
So only the first receiver can download the junk-mail from the legal server
through the spam-pointer,and the second receiver can\'t download it if he use
\"retr\" command.
D)It\'s difficult to confirm the qualification of \"Email-content servers\".
But I think CA can works,it can works too.
----
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf