Re: [Asrg] RFC5451 Re: who gets the report, was We really don't need

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Mon, 08 February 2010 19:10 UTC

Return-Path: <msk@cloudmark.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 D4D6D3A7474 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 11:10:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 z8N8riwQrE7e for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 11:10:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6AFD3A71A9 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 11:10:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by spite.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.72]) with mapi; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 11:11:39 -0800
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 11:11:36 -0800
Thread-Topic: [Asrg] RFC5451 Re: who gets the report, was We really don't need
Thread-Index: Acqo7cI8q0GrT94gTyy8o4Q+hI3L5wABKFhg
Message-ID: <BB012BD379D7B046ABE1472D8093C61C01C3C452A4@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <20100208153359.56374.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <20100208164237.389722425C@panix5.panix.com> <4B704FFC.8040306@tana.it> <4B7059C9.2060102@nortel.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B7059C9.2060102@nortel.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-cr-hashedpuzzle: SRY= Ajlt BMv+ BY8g C24a DaLi Dhs+ EDfv E9XU GbRD HARK HH0y IPqW JeaC JvkW JzaD; 1; YQBzAHIAZwBAAGkAcgB0AGYALgBvAHIAZwA=; Sosha1_v1; 7; {E0973EB3-3A58-4E2C-BBE7-BFD91649F408}; bQBzAGsAQABjAGwAbwB1AGQAbQBhAHIAawAuAGMAbwBtAA==; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:11:36 GMT; UgBFADoAIABbAEEAcwByAGcAXQAgAFIARgBDADUANAA1ADEAIABSAGUAOgAgACAAdwBoAG8AIABnAGUAdABzACAAdABoAGUAIAByAGUAcABvAHIAdAAsACAAdwBhAHMAIABXAGUAIAByAGUAYQBsAGwAeQAgAGQAbwBuACcAdAAgAG4AZQBlAGQA
x-cr-puzzleid: {E0973EB3-3A58-4E2C-BBE7-BFD91649F408}
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Asrg] RFC5451 Re: who gets the report, was We really don't need
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: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:10:42 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: asrg-bounces@irtf.org [mailto:asrg-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of
> Chris Lewis
> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 10:37 AM
> To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF
> Subject: [Asrg] RFC5451 Re: who gets the report, was We really don't
> need
> 
> Could we not do this by extending 5451 semantics to have a "where to
> complain to" cause?

That might work, if there's a reliable way to get that information and relay it to MUAs.

Are you talking about an internal destination for spam reports (e.g. your IT group), or an external one (e.g. abuse@domain)?