Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - AMTP (rev 01)

[Yakov Shafranovich <research@solidmatrix.com>]

Bill Weinman wrote:
> At 10:02 PM 9/28/2003, Phil Miller wrote:
>
> > Major nitpick: "roll" is a kind of bread; you mean "role".
>
> Sheeesh! It's also a popular delivery mechanism for toilet paper.
>
> That's embarrassing. The first fix is in place for -02. Thanks.
>
> > Now, for my real beef: the DNS requirements break the use of 
> > 'residential' ISP lines for hosting AMTP servers.
>
> This needs to go in the FAQ. It's by far the most common objection.
> ...
Hi Bill,

First of all, thanks for keeping us updated on the progress of your 
proposal. I would like to point out that we have two documents, the 
requirements document 
(http://www.infobro.com/anon-FTP/infoSource/IRTF/ASRG/draft-irtf-asrg-requirements-xx-05.txt) 
and the technical considerations document 
(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crocker-spam-techconsider-02.txt) 
which both include an list of evaluation guidelines. It would be great 
if you can run your proposal past those two checklists, and include the 
results inside the main draft instead of the separate FAQ. This way we 
can evaluate the impact of the proposal easier and can have the 
information in the document itself, instead of a separate FAQ.

Second, I would like to ask if you can clarify for us whether your 
proposal seeks to replace SMTP completely. Section 3 of your draft says:

"  AMTP inherits the specification of SMTP and builds upon it. This
   document specifies only the changes to SMTP and therefore implicitly
   incorporates the most recent SMTP specification [RFC2821] except
   where indicated."

If this is true, then I would like you to address the following 
objections from the technical considerations document:

"    The idea of replacing SMTP is appealing because it
     permits thinking in terms of creating an infrastructure
     that has accountability and restrictions built in.
     Unfortunately an installed base the size of the
     Internet is not likely to make such a change anytime
     soon.  It seems far more likely that successful spam
     control mechanisms will be introduced as increments to
     the existing Internet mail service.
"

In particular we would like to consider whether it would be more viable 
to reformulate your protocol as an ESMTP extension rather than a 
replacement for SMTP.

Yakov


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