IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Hisham Khartabil" <hisham.khartabil@gmail.com> Tue, 01 April 2008 05:35 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 B63203A6970; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:35:55 -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 504733A684A for <rucus@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:35:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 tNOR0A6GtFrd for <rucus@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:35:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hs-out-0708.google.com (hs-out-0708.google.com [64.233.178.243]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05F6D28C19C for <rucus@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:35:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by hs-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id 4so1570070hsl.5 for <rucus@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=XQMMfl6GvjVL0lpHv2N2igTXWDs3+AgEeVn9LWxpsCY=; b=SgUHSk3Zdl59rLZZTufqQryJ6T6vE9GP2rZUAz0172zuUJdRG+adOC9TB4mv6Kax+0MaiynmeJ12DqeTXqlxK3u26AOf8WaTSl0rylFA6o1fXSVZxZTKvuqu/ywiCAUjbPstfTJVHyKOozadaCm6p3RLr9lcnWSNmgUzdD3WTQg=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=US3W283evTXwfV3CBRvkdwKVoaEaP+JgtVWq2VR2kZYTolGOXNWVRHN73V+yZZnMUPMO3f2k+/s+qS7OJTGjHDUtMSZUZAUnhwHg9HfvkTpRuGmysylpr2EbJXOoRwHfOTz+YKYlvozTkTczHnMAfnTTyH8e3aTpm6+sqAluCZE=
Received: by 10.114.57.1 with SMTP id f1mr11656905waa.78.1207028146105; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.76.11 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <66cd252f0803312235t3f1e45f1v9f2f3a95e4ddd3ef@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:35:46 +1100
From: Hisham Khartabil <hisham.khartabil@gmail.com>
To: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <0f4e01c893b9$36a8e3d0$c5f0200a@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <18a603a60803210206h7d0d3077q6c07a5062c182624@mail.gmail.com> <20080321094128.GA3087@bofh.priv.at> <18a603a60803210516g749a0e1av98de7acf627d15a9@mail.gmail.com> <01bf01c88b67$50273be0$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <66cd252f0803312218h1e342cb1v689b10d0ec910fbc@mail.gmail.com> <0f4e01c893b9$36a8e3d0$c5f0200a@cisco.com>
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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0178521086=="
Sender: rucus-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rucus-bounces@ietf.org

Once the spammer get his/her 1,000,000,000 receivers willing to receive
spam, s/he might leave the other 4 billion alone.

Anyway, I agree its not the best solution.

Hisham


On 01/04/2008, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> 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