Andriy G. Tereshchenko
Sent: August 16, 2004 7:22 AM
John Glube wrote at Monday, August 16, 2004 2:00 PM :
However, everyone likes to sell goods and services to the
American consumer.
And it is relatively easy for American based internet
service providers to block all email coming from any one
nation.
This is called racism. Let's now put "Not for black" or
"Not for Chinese" signs on ISP servers. Welcome to world of
freedom and equality :-(
Presumption of innocence is an essential human right. You
are proposing to take this right away from some nations
based on your bad experience with a few people from them.
Andriy, I am simply reporting how 'stuff' works. The fact
this is how things happens or will happen does not mean I
agree or disagree.
Now you are proposing the same for emails. Unless you are
marked with "Good" tag - no way to deliver it.
I am not proposing this. This is what happens when you move
from an open to a closed email system and what is my
understanding of the ultimate objective of sender
authentication, reputation and accreditation.
In saying this, I would state the objective slightly
differently:
Unless the sender has a "good reputation," email will be
filtered for spamminness and depending on the result may or
may not be rejected.
Now, if one is sending UBE, then yes since the objective is
unless you have a "good reputation" your email will be
filtered, the result is your email will not be delivered.
The basis on how I formed this understanding includes the
following:
The Aspen Institute Proposal
http://spf.pobox.com/aspen.html
The Can Spam Act of 2003
http://www.learnsteps4profit.com/antispamus.html
The IETF Marid Working Group
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/marid-charter.html
(the proposed protocols presently before this group, along
with decisions made at a number of WG meetings)
The FTC's Feasibility Study of a National Do Not Email List
http://www.learnsteps4profit.com/dne.html
My understanding has been confirmed with recent actions
being taken to establish reputation services as reported to
the SPF discuss list by Meng.
Bottom line? Spammers, phishers and every one else involved
in online consumer fraud and theft of property will not
like what is being done.
Again, appreciate I am simply reporting my understanding.
You are completely free to disagree with my understanding
of the implications of what is transpiring.
However, I would ask that you not attack me as the
messenger by suggesting I am racist. These statements I
completely reject out of hand.
Rather deal with the material before you.
John
John Glube
Toronto, Canada
--
Andriy G. Tereshchenko
Odessa, Ukraine
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
http://www.InboxEvent.com/?s=d --- Inbox Event Nov 17-19 in
Atlanta features SPF and Sender ID.
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate
your subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 11/08/2004
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 11/08/2004