RE: [Asrg] Re: Spam send/receive ratio

["Chris" <asrg at rebel.com.au>]

Have you read the thread or just picked out something to comment on?

> >>> [...] the statistics of mail volume [...]
> > alone its useless, combined with other "triggers" its still useless.
>
> I disagree.  If I were setting up my ideal ISP, one thing it would
> include is watching the outgoing email volume from each account.  A
> sudden spike would cause throttling and flagging for human attention.
> The human could then reopen the throttle, block the account, check with
> the owner, whatever.

If you had read the thread you would have seen this is exactly what I said
it was at most useable for. and in fact went on to outline how this would be
applied (at Alans request) which included an automated turing test to allow
the sender to confirm whether or not they in fact intended to send that
quantity of mail.

This rather lengthy explanation was only two or three mailings ago.

unfortunately at the receiving end mail volumes is in fact *useless*.

It fails for the reasons I have stated in this thread. Regardles of Alans
protestations to the contrary he has not outlined how it would/could work.
only drawn references to statistics and not outlined how those statistics
would and could be applied.

>
> "Useless"?  Maybe.  I haven't had the luxury of being able to try it.
> But I suspect it wouldn't be.
>

Read the thread you will at least see why I think it is useless. No-one has
yet come up with a counter point or example of how it could work.

>
> As Alan said, did you actually read the message you're responding to?
> It looks more as though you picked out one point, carried it to an
> extreme not supported by the message you took it from, and then argued
> against that extreme.
>

Quite the opposite but I did leave out what had been gone over before. It
seems you only read Alans mail and took his word for it.

I can only respond on what needs to be responded about. WE ALL skip portions
of messages we don't feel are necessary to respond to. If we didnt we would
spend our days responding to longer and longer messages and nothing would be
achieved.

Not that I am saying anything is actually being achieved. Disappointingly it
is not.

Chris



> -----Original Message-----
> From: asrg-admin at ietf.org [mailto:asrg-admin at ietf.org]On Behalf Of der
> Mouse
> Sent: Monday, 24 May 2004 1:59 AM
> To: asrg at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: Spam send/receive ratio
>
>
> >>> [...] the statistics of mail volume [...]
> > alone its useless, combined with other "triggers" its still useless.
>
> I disagree.  If I were setting up my ideal ISP, one thing it would
> include is watching the outgoing email volume from each account.  A
> sudden spike would cause throttling and flagging for human attention.
> The human could then reopen the throttle, block the account, check with
> the owner, whatever.
>
> "Useless"?  Maybe.  I haven't had the luxury of being able to try it.
> But I suspect it wouldn't be.
>
> As Alan said, did you actually read the message you're responding to?
> It looks more as though you picked out one point, carried it to an
> extreme not supported by the message you took it from, and then argued
> against that extreme.
>
> /~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
> \ / Ribbon Campaign
>  X  Against HTML	       mouse at 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 at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg


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