Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 04 February 2010 23:20 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90BEE28C1E8 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 15:20:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -19.056
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-19.056 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.013, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SUBJECT_FUZZY_TION=0.156]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CgyzSoYgH6xi for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 15:20:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [208.31.42.53]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D510B28C199 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 15:20:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 46263 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2010 23:20:47 -0000
Received: from mail1.iecc.com (208.31.42.56) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 4 Feb 2010 23:20:47 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=k1002; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=jCmFaxF2YqEA7l8TKVQ4zDjNoLl7aZzCX7uvFB88260=; b=CEaBt8e/t+JifssESaw9EZC/XpD7xxIhIj/LiQJo4xtG0Yl1QljEVOoJpvlF4JlT8EVqvyWEjCTHHuiDmEDWcMmVPYSVQyTZXbdq+Hl0o6oNtCxKypl8JhJR862jVzA0KIgf0dgYTD/hlZFvB/gE5MLNUvGLI/cT6h/dWHF/8Jg=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=k1002; bh=jCmFaxF2YqEA7l8TKVQ4zDjNoLl7aZzCX7uvFB88260=; b=PdMxJcr3FqAZLxW7cWPoHA7tDFteU9GVkeA27f3072s7I3M8gchunEPyGL7MZnx6XdaV5DN/rGw5Qcc0Rus/da12pEYwQ1HqG72RaBlvmURY8+iyJEkX48hKWE+KEIasePsqdWljNNUaDRXlwko0vla/IyM1xH5N6JPNB6KwAi8=
Date: 4 Feb 2010 23:20:46 -0000
Message-ID: <20100204232046.53178.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: asrg@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <4B6B0D59.5000909@mtcc.com>
Organization:
Cc:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 23:20:03 -0000

>In any case it hardly matters because POP3 and IMAP are completely different
>protocols with different constituencies. You'd never have a standards effort
>that lumps them together in a million years, and even if you did you'd do
>nothing more than needlessly confuse the programmers of their respective
>code bases.

Actually, we've seen a reasonable suggestion a few messages back that
would work equally well with POP and IMAP: extract a reporting address
from the message and send it an ARF report.  It has the admirable
characteristic of being completely agnostic about how the mail is
delivered, since there are plenty of delivery techniques other than
POP and IMAP, such as WebDAV, uucp (still handy for intermittent
connections), fetchmail, and just reading the local mailstore.

R's,
John

PS: If you're going to make disparaging remarks, could you at least
try and make well informed ones?