Re: [Asrg] Grouped reply on permissions lists

gep2@terabites.com Fri, 20 June 2003 23:02 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13839 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:02:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5KN28W01547 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:02:08 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19TUtU-0000Os-MJ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:02:08 -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 TAA13825; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:02:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19TUtR-0004Bh-00; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:02:05 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19TUtQ-0004Bb-00; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:02:04 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19TUtN-0000L1-7i; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:02:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19TUsP-0000KH-HE for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:01:01 -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 TAA13800 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:00:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: gep2@terabites.com
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19TUsM-0004BG-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:00:58 -0400
Received: from h007.c000.snv.cp.net ([209.228.32.71] helo=c000.snv.cp.net) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19TUsL-0004BD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:00:58 -0400
Received: (cpmta 22688 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2003 16:00:57 -0700
Received: from 12.239.18.238 (HELO WinProxy.anywhere) by smtp.terabites.com (209.228.32.71) with SMTP; 20 Jun 2003 16:00:57 -0700
X-Sent: 20 Jun 2003 23:00:57 GMT
Received: from 192.168.0.30 by 192.168.0.1 (WinProxy); Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:00:16 -0600
Received: from 192.168.0.240 (unverified [192.168.0.240]) by nts1.terabites.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id <B0000024133@nts1.terabites.com>; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:27:23 -0500
Message-ID: <B0000024133@nts1.terabites.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Grouped reply on permissions lists
To: Yakov Shafranovich <research@solidmatrix.com>, gep2@terabites.com, asrg@ietf.org
Cc: wishlist@microsoft.com
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030620160658.00b9a940@solidmatrix.com>
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17
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/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:27:23 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Yakov Shafranovich <research@solidmatrix.com> wrote:
>At 03:00 PM 6/20/2003 -0500, gep2@terabites.com wrote:
>
>> >> However, you would cut down you spam load significantly if you rejected
>> > all mail with "Content-type: text/html" SMTP or MIME entity headers
>> > from strangers.
>>
>> > How can you have it both ways? You either receive email from strangers
>>or you don't.
>>
>>The point is BY DEFAULT to reject unsolicited HTML-burdened E-mail, or 
>>mail from untrusted/unknown senders that contains attachments.  By so 
>>doing, you will shrink spam byte volume by probably 90% or more.  You'll 
>>also eliminate in one fell swoop the GREAT majority of viruses, worms, and 
>>trojans.
>>
>>Plain ASCII text will continue to be delivered as before.
>>[..]

>My main problem with this and similar proposals is that they assume that a 
>consent system is in place that lets users authorize certain people to send 
>them email. The problem is that no such system exists and the goal of this 
>group is to make such system (see charter). Instead of bickering over a 
>specific filtering case, perhaps we should consider the larger question of 
>consent systems and how users can express such consent.

The whole point is that THIS DOESN'T REQUIRE consensus agreement.  It can be 
implemented by a single ISP using technology of their choice.

We could discuss suggested 'best practices' and such, although this sort of 
thing (if designed well) is the sort of thing which will differentiate one ISP's 
services from a competitor.

Gordon Peterson                  http://personal.terabites.com/
1977-2002  Twenty-fifth anniversary year of Local Area Networking!
Support the Anti-SPAM Amendment!  Join at http://www.cauce.org/
12/19/98: Partisan Republicans scornfully ignore the voters they "represent".
12/09/00: the date the Republican Party took down democracy in America.



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