Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

John Levine wrote:

> Not to reignite the usual spam argument, but it is (unfortunately in 
> this case) not 1988 or even 1998 any more.  When upwards of 90% of all 
> mail is spam, keeping mail usable is at least as dependent on limiting 
> the spam that shows up in people's mailboxes as delivering the trickle 
> of good mail.

deleting mail based on bogus criteria is not keeping mail usable.  it's 
killing it.

> Real life spam filters use metrics and tune to the actual behavior of 
> mailers.  If most of the mail that comes from domains with AAAA and no 
> MX is spam, they'll tune for that, and it won't be a mistake.

yes it will.  partially because the behavior of one domain is generally 
independent of that of another, partially because the volume of mail 
produced by such domains is largely independent of the behavior of any 
single domain, and partially because spammers (being a smaller 
population) will adapt more quickly to avoid getting trapped by this 
shortsighted hack.

> For the forseeable future, most such mail will be from zombies, and it'll all be 
> spam.

maybe the zombies are the ones who are using statistics inappropriately 
to decide how to filter mail.

people need to stop defending such stupidity.

Keith
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf