RE: [Asrg] Consent Proposal

At 07:01 PM 6/27/2003 -0400, Barry Shein wrote:

>How is any of this consent/filtering related to the usual IETF purpose
>such as protocol documents (RFCs, etc), network engineering, and not
>just some ad hoc User Interface Engineering?
>
>It seems to me the consent proposals (getting any attention) thus far
>require no change to any existing protocols or standards, and don't
>seem to imply any new protocols or standards.
>
>Where in the stack would any of this fit and why does this group need
>to be involved?

As I mentioned before there are two models here - network abuse model which 
you are proposing and consent model which is defined in the charter. The 
network abuse model as you propose would seek to find ways to detect and 
stop spammers from using the Internet for abusive behavior (i.e. spam) It 
may also include viruses, worms, etc. as a side benefit.

Both models in my opinion are equally good. However, they call for 
different solutions and approaches. Both models will involve changing 
existing protocols (i.e. SMTP) and defining new ones (like CRI). That is 
where IETF gets involved.

The consent model specifically is not limited to the MUAs, but can be 
enforced by MTAs on ISP level as well. In order to do so a framework and 
various protocols must be worked out. I will be posting a document sometime 
later on this week laying out both models in detail.

Yakov 

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