IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rucus] Maybe we should use the keyword: please

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Tue, 01 April 2008 05:28 UTC

Return-Path: <rucus-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: rucus-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rucus-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD3853A6985; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:28:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rucus@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rucus@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45D133A6985 for <rucus@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:28:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.348, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 gG+p3NsyS1-c for <rucus@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 514103A6870 for <rucus@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 31 Mar 2008 22:28:27 -0700
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m315SRrO001453; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:28:27 -0700
Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m315SQIQ009096; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 05:28:27 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'Hisham Khartabil' <hisham.khartabil@gmail.com>
References: <18a603a60803210206h7d0d3077q6c07a5062c182624@mail.gmail.com> <20080321094128.GA3087@bofh.priv.at> <18a603a60803210516g749a0e1av98de7acf627d15a9@mail.gmail.com> <01bf01c88b67$50273be0$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <66cd252f0803312218h1e342cb1v689b10d0ec910fbc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:28:26 -0700
Message-ID: <0f4e01c893b9$36a8e3d0$c5f0200a@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <66cd252f0803312218h1e342cb1v689b10d0ec910fbc@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
Thread-Index: AciTt+Fn9Ki3yafyRQONSSUNdJ6ODwAAMf8A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1021; t=1207027707; x=1207891707; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Dan=20Wing=22=20<dwing@cisco.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[Rucus]=20Maybe=20we=20should=20use=20t he=20keyword=3A=20please |Sender:=20; bh=pZ7WMykgZhaQeuWRXO6Vb90pr0WgHZyEnEjJUTilR3s=; b=vIEN2Vwmk6rXWgRLoGp5UMO6DtaQPSVeXi6ojRg1fEu88B7MGJNuiQwqVw OKFg+JiW4SPY9oxk9ybUZg/B7NkKFMN2/K44uUOSHQlsKztbqfP0g+J/dL+v LyZw2m844/;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=dwing@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; );
Cc: rucus@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Rucus] Maybe we should use the keyword: please
X-BeenThere: rucus@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Reducing Unwanted Communication Using SIP \(RUCUS\)" <rucus.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus>, <mailto:rucus-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/rucus>
List-Post: <mailto:rucus@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rucus-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus>, <mailto:rucus-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: rucus-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rucus-bounces@ietf.org

SMTP tried that,
http://www.tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoffman-legis-smtp-banner-03 

-d

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hisham Khartabil [mailto:hisham.khartabil@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 10:18 PM
> To: Dan Wing
> Cc: Pars Mutaf; Otmar Lendl; rucus@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Rucus] Maybe we should use the keyword: please
> 
> Well, it's useful in that it legalises SPAM. It allows the 
> spammer to put junk in your inbox because you didn't 
> explicitly put the "No junk mail, please" sticker on your inbox :)
>  
> Hisham
> 
>  
> On 22/03/2008, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com> wrote: 
> 
> 
> 	> My problem is rather technical. Would such separation 
> of SIP URIs be
> 	> feasable technically.
> 	
> 	As in,
> 	
> 	sip:+14085551234@cisco.com;spam=no
> 	
> 	No, I don't see that being useful.
> 	
> 	-d
> 	
> 	_______________________________________________
> 	Rucus mailing list
> 	Rucus@ietf.org
> 	https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus
> 	
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Rucus mailing list
Rucus@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email