IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Endymail] spam versus cleartext

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Sun, 07 September 2014 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: endymail@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: endymail@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF4D71A0406 for <endymail@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 08:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.153
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.153 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ePhJx-F_8yBY for <endymail@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 08:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DDA41A0537 for <endymail@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 08:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1206; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1410102175; x=1411311775; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=0PWXJ9C4N6FgMIGoHDRlpYfH1QqQK31mn7qoeroVUoY=; b=DKUK0tCcl6g2HB7ukyGRMSAqFOc1MZ4oT91PRBKtw7QtpJkmyPKUKLk7 53c68TqYBWRbf3dwqOJhamr7bmBn/dTJybJAyfU1dM4eQjUW/DcW5srN4 kkAJclX/3Qvpmfc4DdzIbUNYbTXNI++rO4VnYzxLX3KxeQhzx10S6+EkR E=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 486
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsYGALxyDFStJssW/2dsb2JhbABZhzOKRcN2AYEYeIQEAQEEI1UBEAsOExYLAgIJAwIBAgFFBg0BBwEBiD6md5UBAReOaxEBUAeCeYFTAQSTRoFKh2KHQY1rg2M7gT6BQAEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,482,1406592000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="164895941"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Sep 2014 15:02:51 +0000
Received: from [10.61.197.219] ([10.61.197.219]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s87F2oVa012647; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 15:02:50 GMT
Message-ID: <540C7399.3060901@cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 17:02:49 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
References: <540AABF8.8000605@cisco.com> <540C5BE1.6010405@qti.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <540C5BE1.6010405@qti.qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="MGFKUMXjVUqFtUXXB5iH07VidTBetv5R1"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/endymail/4bzKM1fRDIDjdikGPfc_9scXyq4
Cc: endymail@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Endymail] spam versus cleartext
X-BeenThere: endymail@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <endymail.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/endymail>, <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/endymail/>
List-Post: <mailto:endymail@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/endymail>, <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 15:02:56 -0000

Let's talk constraints for a moment.  Does the problem get easier if we
say, “let's not even attempt to address transactional email”, and focus
exclusively on h2h?  Also, is it a goal to completely do away with
spam?  Is that a non-goal?

Eliot

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email