RE: [Asrg] C/R Thoughts: Take 1

["Eric Dean" <eric@purespeed.com>]

I agree.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: asrg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:asrg-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Eric
> S. Johansson
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 11:46 AM
> To: Eric Dean
> Cc: asrg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Asrg] C/R Thoughts: Take 1
>
>
> Eric Dean wrote:
>
> >>so, I'll argue for system that will allow automated systems to
> >>talk to each
> >>other by e-mail without any human interaction.
> >
> >
> > In fact, we'll have to support both.  Newer software can automate this
> > process while we'll have to rely on plain old SMTP for legacy use.
>
> why differentiate?  Or at least, why differentiate on the basis
> of target or
> protocol?  You can handle both automated and manual responses in the same
> message without working hard or increasing complexity in the network.
>
> By placing sufficient information for automatic handling in the
> headers, and
> human oriented information in the body, you can satisfy the
> demands of both
> automatic handling in human handling in one message.
>
> example: in camram, I include an instance of a stamp with every
> message.  In
> this message, I will generate two stamps one to asrg and the
> second one to
> eric@purespeed.com.  They look something like to stand generated
> for an earlier
> posting:
>
> X-Camram: stamp; 0:030514:asrg@ietf.org:c407927fbaad1fa8
>
> In the body of the message is the human oriented material i.e.
> content for the
> mailing list.  The receiving filter sees the stamp, verifies that it is
> "correct" (i.e. 20 bit string of zeros collision) and that it is
> addressed for
> the recipient (one type of double spending) with the date that
> isn't too old
> (second type of double spending).  On receipt of a valid stamp,
> the filter knows
> to pass the message on to my inbox.  The same model can apply to
> other forms of
> automated challenge/response.
>
> part of the reason I take this approach is because I realized a
> while ago that
> e-mail is a two-level protocol.  You have the lower-level
> transport protocol
> (SMTP) which is content independent.  Then you have the higher
> level protocol as
> represented by the message format which is instructions given by
> one e-mail
> client to another.  By modifying the higher level protocol by
> adding stamps or
> other action triggers, you can improved e-mail system
> functionality without
> destroying the existing infrastructure.
>
> and yes I will be working on a working draft describing a stamp
> based protocol
> as soon as I can clear the decks a little bit.
>
> it would help if I could resist answering e-mail... ;-)
>
> ---eric
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asrg mailing list
> Asrg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
>

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg