RE: [Asrg] (no subject)

Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com> Wed, 28 April 2004 22:18 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA28848 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:18:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIxJU-0002b1-OX for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:13:57 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i3SMDupX009977 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:13:56 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIx1J-0008BK-J9 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:55:09 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA26106 for <asrg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:55:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BIx1F-0003UL-Rj for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:55:05 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BIwyw-00032k-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:52:43 -0400
Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BIwx1-0002dE-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:50:43 -0400
Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BIwpF-0001tr-Jf for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:42:41 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIwT8-0001D6-Sw; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:19:50 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIvwe-0003Fl-NJ for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:46:17 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA18666 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:46:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BIvwb-0002hU-F8 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:46:13 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BIvvN-0002V7-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:44:57 -0400
Received: from pcls2.std.com ([192.74.137.142] helo=TheWorld.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BIvuX-0002MX-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:44:05 -0400
Received: from world.std.com (root@world-e.std.com [69.38.147.5]) by TheWorld.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i3SKi6Rd009181; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:44:06 -0400
Received: (from bzs@localhost) by world.std.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA23925; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:44:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <16528.6037.193578.537697@world.std.com>
To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
Cc: 'Barry Shein' <bzs@world.std.com>, John Levine <asrg@johnlevine.com>, asrg@ietf.org, richard_willey@symantec.com
Subject: RE: [Asrg] (no subject)
In-Reply-To: <C6DDA43B91BFDA49AA2F1E473732113E5DBBD3@mou1wnexm05.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
References: <C6DDA43B91BFDA49AA2F1E473732113E5DBBD3@mou1wnexm05.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under Emacs 21.2.2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:44:05 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,NO_COST autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Yeah well via some creative editing you managed to reverse my point
and create a straw man to argue with.

The responded-to claim was that it's difficult if not impossible to
imagine a system which could impose a charging mechanism on 5 billion
e-mail msgs/day, too many transactions.

I countred that the fact that we obviously handle those 5B msgs/day
would not seem to argue AGAINST the possibility of adding a little
more processing to each, it would seem to argue FOR the possibility.


But a proof? No, not a proof, not either way. Which was my point
exactly.



On April 27, 2004 at 19:51 pbaker@verisign.com (Hallam-Baker, Phillip) wrote:
 > 
 > > 5 billion transactions per day doesn't impress me as proof positive
 > > of anything, particularly world-wide.
 > > 
 > > Obviously if we can deliver that many emails per day THEN WE CLEARLY
 > > CAN HANDLE THAT MANY TRANSACTIONS PER DAY! Nicht wahr?
 > 
 > The fact we perform 5 billion transactions with no charge mechanism in an
 > entirely decentralized fashion does not provide an existence proof for
 > being able to resolve 5 billion charge transactions.
 > 
 > VeriSign handles 5 billion transactions a day and many milions of payment
 > transactions, they even flow through some of the same systems. But they
 > are not directly equivalent. A single payment transaction costs several 
 > hundred times more to support than a single DNS transaction.
 > 
 > Funny thing is that the minute I suggest accreditation, which would
 > involve each mail server requiring an SSL cert equivalent we have people
 > railing against 'the VeriSign tax'. Then folk go and suggest a payment
 > system which will inevitably require micropayments. Go work out where
 > the cybercash IP is owned.
 > 
 > I don't see the market opportunity here. Setting up a system that could
 > handle the demands is certainly possible, it is already in place for the 
 > telephone. But the telephone markets are trending towards flat fee 
 > charging.
 > 
 > 
 > 		Phill

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg