IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Spam reporting over IMAP

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Wed, 11 January 2012 20:27 UTC

Return-Path: <msk@cloudmark.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE041F0C4F for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:27:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.578
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.578 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RYnveGQ51Y4V for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:27:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675671F0C46 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:27:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from malice.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.71) by EXCH-HTCAS901.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:27:36 -0800
Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:27:43 -0800
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:27:43 -0800
Thread-Topic: [apps-discuss] Spam reporting over IMAP
Thread-Index: AczQRD806X6VlO/xT8m+c17brcFj6gAWnMng
Message-ID: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C1580F@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C157A4@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120109155713.0b022fe0@resistor.net> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C157C8@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120109171236.0ad2e840@resistor.net> <4F0C8F7E.4070809@tana.it> <6.2.5.6.2.20120110124010.0968e868@resistor.net> <4F0D57A6.70508@tana.it>
In-Reply-To: <4F0D57A6.70508@tana.it>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "Jon M. Jurgovan" <jjurgovan@rim.com>, Sarah Guichard <sguichard@rim.com>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Spam reporting over IMAP
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:27:46 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alessandro Vesely
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:35 AM
> To: apps-discuss@ietf.org; Jon M. Jurgovan
> Cc: Sarah Guichard
> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Spam reporting over IMAP
> 
> > Zoltan Ordogh and Alessandro Vesely are listed as the author/editor of
> > draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed-00.  Are they stating
> > on behalf of Research In Motion Limited that IPR disclosure #1609 is
> > not applicable for draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed-00?
> 
> Not only I cannot speak for RIM, but I have never actually seen that
> patent application.  I'm looking forward for a RIM's statement that
> either confirms or denies that that patent does not apply to a reduced
> version like the one I posted.  I'm confident that my post can be
> deleted promptly in case RIM gives a negative response.
> 
> The IPR is filed here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1609/

This looks and feels a lot like the IPR claim Yahoo! made against DomainKeys (RFC4870).  The difference here, I think, is that Yahoo! also offered into the public domain an open source implementation of DK.  Does RIM plan to do something like that too?

Otherwise, I'm concerned that we will be contributing, presumably for "free", support in development of this toward the standards track where the beneficiary is RIM.  Not a very "open" approach to an open standards body.  I personally wouldn't be inclined to be very supportive.

Hopefully RIM can give us some good assurances that this is all on the level.  Or give us all free Blackberries.

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email