Re: [Asrg] 3. Proof-of-work analysis

[der Mouse <mouse at Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>]

>>>> That works currently against spamware that pipelines illegally.
>>> Problem is that there are lots of people using these techniques for
>>> good reason.
>> Problem?  What problem?  I am quite happy to reject mail from people
>> who think they deserve to be exempted from the RFCs that apply to
>> everyone else
> Is this another example of the SMTP spec having requirements, but
> supplying no provisions for satisfying, or enforcing, those
> requirements?

Right.  Like most protocols, the enforcement mechanism consists of
interoperation failures.  However, unlike most protocols, historical
implementations of SMTP have tolerated many and egregious protocol
violations, so there is a chicken-and-egg problem with rolling in
protocol conformance checks.

Illegal pipelining is just one of the forms of protocol violation that
has historically been tolerated, and has current prominence because
it's now being abused by ratware.  This has produced a positive side to
adopting pipelining conformance checks, counterbalancing the negative
side that has kept such checks out until now.  We're now in the
uncomfortable unsettled transition period from widely unchecked and
nonconforming to widely checked and conforming.

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

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