Re: [Asrg] request for review for a non FUSSP proposal

[Alessandro Vesely <[e-mail]>]

Claudio Telmon wrote:
>> problem in the transition to consent-enabled mailboxes: When users 
>> switch their mailboxes to consent-enabled, they lose the ability to 
>> receive any message from consent-unaware senders, including friends, 
>> business contacts, mailing lists, banks and similar notification 
>> services, reminders, cell phones, etcetera.
>
> You're absolutely right, of course. This is the most critical deployment
> issue, and I have tried to consider some strategies in the "deployment" 
> section. Nobody could actually "switch" to consent-enabled mailboxes: a 
> gradual, albeit less effective transition path is required.

Your are right, in turn: after reading the "deployment" section, it is 
fairly clear that a transition is not necessary. I'm not sure how well 
point "Voluntary participation" 2.3.9 of Danny's criteria connotes 
your framework as not being an anti-spam technique. I think it may 
actually have more chances when explicitly targeted to guard children, 
rather than generically "non FUSSP".