IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] draft-irtf-asrg-criteria (was Re: request for review for a non FUSSP proposal)

Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk> Fri, 26 June 2009 10:54 UTC

Return-Path: <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
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 3F0F93A67AD for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.149
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.349, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799]
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 B-SsFjWuRAbq for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from karpinski.uscs.susx.ac.uk (karpinski.uscs.susx.ac.uk [139.184.14.85]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54DED3A6A75 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:54:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk ([139.184.134.43]:60702) by karpinski.uscs.susx.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.64) (envelope-from <iane@sussex.ac.uk>) id KLUEA7-000N09-7N for asrg@irtf.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:54:07 +0100
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:53:18 +0100
From: Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
Sender: iane@sussex.ac.uk
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Message-ID: <BA6A888ED97A19D1F0B06763@lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4A449A7C.6070106@tana.it>
References: <4A43B696.2000106@cybernothing.org> <4A449A7C.6070106@tana.it>
Originator-Info: login-token=Mulberry:01PNmcs6U6Chh9RvAVqP+vTg8molG9DZ//sUQ=; token_authority=support@its.sussex.ac.uk
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Sussex: true
X-Sussex-transport: remote_smtp
Subject: Re: [Asrg] draft-irtf-asrg-criteria (was Re: request for review for a non FUSSP proposal)
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: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:54:15 -0000

--On 26 June 2009 11:53:00 +0200 Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> wrote:

>
> Hey, that implies interest in finding new anti-spam techniques! Good, but
> I think the assumption "that there will be early adopters" [2.3.9] might
> be misunderstood as an overpromising statement.

It's simply saying that not everyone will adopt the proposal at the same 
time. The alternatives are "everyone will adopt it at once" (a common 
pitfall), and "nobody will ever adopt it" (a risk for any proposal).  A 
common counter to many proposals is that they won't work unless everyone 
adopts the proposal at the same time. 2.3.9 tries to warn of this 
possibility.

Perhaps it should read "there will be early adopters (if any at all)".

-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email