Re: MLM subaddress requirement
"Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee@cybercash.com> Tue, 05 August 1997 22:21 UTC
Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa02764; 5 Aug 97 18:21 EDT
Received: from mail.proper.com (mail.proper.com [206.86.127.224]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid SAA14667; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 18:19:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by mail.proper.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) id OAA12890 for ietf-822-bks; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from callandor.cybercash.com (callandor.cybercash.com [204.178.186.70]) by mail.proper.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA12885 for <ietf-822@imc.org>; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by callandor.cybercash.com; id RAA06369; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 17:52:06 -0400
Received: from cybercash.com(204.149.68.52) by callandor.cybercash.com via smap (3.2) id xma006338; Tue, 5 Aug 97 17:51:42 -0400
Received: by cybercash.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03693; Tue, 5 Aug 97 17:57:35 EDT
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 17:57:35 -0400
From: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee@cybercash.com>
To: ietf-822@imc.org
Subject: Re: MLM subaddress requirement
In-Reply-To: <199708052003.QAA16636@black-ice.cc.vt.edu>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970805175355.3412B-100000@cybercash.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/SIGNED; BOUNDARY="==_Exmh_739160646P"; MICALG="pgp-md5"; PROTOCOL="application/pgp-signature"
Content-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970805175355.3412C@cybercash.com>
Sender: owner-ietf-822@imc.org
Precedence: bulk
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 16:03:10 -0400 > From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu > > On Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:20:58 PDT, Chris Newman said: > > What is the purpose of restricting postings based on the envelope address? > > It's obviously *not* a security issue as anyone can generate email from > > any address trivially (own a copy of Netscape?). I claim the primary > > purpose is to reduce spam. Permitting postings from user if user+foo is > > subscribed has no impact on this primary purpose. > > ARGH!!! > > How many times do I have to say this? > > *YOU* *DO* *NOT* *KNOW* if 'user' and 'user+foo' are in fact the same > address or not. You cannot tell if the remote system sending the mail is > or is not using your extension. When non-ASCII text was added to 822 headers, a syntactic convention was found which appears to have had no collision with any actually used ASCII text, even though in principle it could. It does not seem to me to be beyond human ken to come up with such a syntax in this case. It probably won't by "+" or "-" :-) Donald ===================================================================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1 508-287-4877(tel) dee@cybercash.com 318 Acton Street +1 508-371-7148(fax) dee@world.std.com Carlisle, MA 01741 USA +1 703-620-4200(main office, Reston, VA) http://www.cybercash.com http://www.eff.org/blueribbon.html
- 50 people vs. newman D. J. Bernstein
- Re: 50 people vs. newman Harald.T.Alvestrand
- Re: 50 people vs. newman Valdis.Kletnieks
- Re: 50 people vs. newman Bart Schaefer
- MLM subaddress requirement Chris Newman
- Re: MLM subaddress requirement Valdis.Kletnieks
- Re: MLM subaddress requirement Chris Newman
- Re: 50 people vs. newman D. J. Bernstein
- Re: 50 people vs. newman Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
- Re: MLM subaddress requirement Valdis.Kletnieks
- Re: 50 people vs. newman D. J. Bernstein
- Re: MLM subaddress requirement Donald E. Eastlake 3rd