Bryan Campbell wrote:
Are we fixing a symptom of a bigger problem? The bigger problem is lack
of accountability. For example, a properly controlled smtp queue can be
limited to only a certain number of messages per day, week, or month.
The billing ISP can bill for excess. If the content, style or type of
message is found to be spam, or viruses, then the offending account can
be charged for the excess or by violation. People respond well to
monetary motivation.
Ah, now we're getting somewhere.
Suppose I exchange a lot of mail with a friend. This mail isn't spam and
it doesn't contain worms. In fact it is very much wanted by my friend.
(For sake of discussion, let's say we're collaborating on a big
conference paper that contains many images, and the paper deadline is
looming).
But you consider it "excessive" because it greatly exceeds the average
amount of email your other customers send, and your email servers are
limited in capacity. Still, our total IP-layer byte counts are modest
because we're far too busy working on our paper to surf the web for porn
and pirated music like your other customers. Do you still plan to charge
for our "excess" email use? If so, why?
And if the purpose of singling out email for special charges is to cover
the costs of your mail servers, then why force us to use them in the
first place? Why not just let us run our own email servers so we need
only use your IP transport facilities? Wouldn't we be doing you a favor?
Or do you have some other reason for making your service less than
totally transparent?
--Phil
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡