Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt

Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com> Fri, 13 May 2011 18:05 UTC

Return-Path: <steve@blighty.com>
X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9F0E0849 for <marf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CgVJj1H9FiKb for <marf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from m.wordtothewise.com (misc.wordtothewise.com [184.105.179.154]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133D9E0839 for <marf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.80.43] (204.11.227.194.static.etheric.net [204.11.227.194]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: steve) by m.wordtothewise.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29ED22EA07 for <marf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:25 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
From: Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikyr7t7vX9D-a3ch+iiTE6j+rmV5g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:20 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <7B6F8C62-0C3B-4180-8F93-337D665BB736@blighty.com>
References: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BANLkTikyr7t7vX9D-a3ch+iiTE6j+rmV5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Message Abuse Report Format working group <marf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt
X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list <marf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/marf>, <mailto:marf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/marf>
List-Post: <mailto:marf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:marf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf>, <mailto:marf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 18:05:28 -0000

On May 13, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:

> Kepeng Li and I have just submitted a draft for consideration by the
> MARF working group:
> 
>> Filename:        draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback
>> Revision:        00
>> Title:           Email Feedback Report Type Value : not-spam
>> Creation date:   2011-05-13
>> WG ID:           Individual Submission
>> Number of pages: 7
>> 
>> Abstract:
>>   This document defines a new Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) feedback
>>   report type value: "not-spam".  It can be used to indicate that a
>>   message that was tagged or categorized as spam (such as by an ISP) in
>>   fact is not spam.
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback
> 
> As noted in the draft the requirement for this comes from the OMA
> SpamRep folks, and also seems like a reasonable need in general.  We'd
> like the MARF working group to review this, and to consider adopting
> it.  It seems like an easy ride, I think.

Probably. Seems harmless.

Is this intended for communication between MUA and message store (doing
much the same thing as an IMAP move from spamfolder to inbox folder)
or is it something that's intended for broader use across administrative
boundaries (like, say, ISP pushback to Postini)?

Cheers,
  Steve