Re: [Asrg] 2a. Analysis - Developer Perspective

["Alan DeKok" <aland@freeradius.org>]

"Hector Santos" <winserver.support@winserver.com> wrote:
> To me, we know what the problem is - the SMTP specification!  We change it
> and the problem is essentially solved!

  The list archives (such as they are) contain a large number of
messages on this topic.  I won't repeat those discussions here.

> As with Fidonet, administrators who were enforcing the compliancy  issues
> restricted the progress and implementation of new ideas to solved and/or
> address issues the system.

  The IETF does not enforce or test for compliance to protocol
specifications.  Doing so would get into a political quagmire, which
is probably best left alone.

> 1)  Only compliant SMTP software should be allowed to distribute mail.

  Who enforces this?  How do you enforce their enforcement?  Will the
abuse by the enforcers be worse than the abuse by the spammers?

> 2)  SMTP software vendors should registered to obtain SMTP product codes.

  There is no central IETF registration of product codes for any
protocol.  I'm not sure it's a good idea to start one now.

> All systems that want to be able to send unsolicated mail must "register"
> with an organized registry system.  This can be done during the installation
> process of the software.
> 
> I will guarantee that if we had such a system in place,  responsible
> software vendors will include the "registration" logic  or risk being locked
> out.

  You, personally, guarantee it?  Hmmm...

  Alan DeKok.

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