Re: [ASRG] 0 - General, Reliability of Transport

[Matthew Elvey <matthew at elvey.com>]

On 5/23/2004 6:55 PM, Chris sent forth electrons to convey:

> > > I am quite solidly in the second group (am I alone).
> > >
> > >      
I'm most definitely not in the first or second group.

> > A third group includes:
> >
> > 3/ Those who believe that mail should be delivered or rejected at the SMTP
> > stage, but not discarded or returned to the envelope from.
> >    
>
>  
>
>  
>
> > A demand that spam detection never make a type II error is hardly
> > different from a demand that spam be tolerated. The 3rd group ensures that
> > mail will not be lost, even if some is not delivered. It does rule out (1)
> > spam detection at the MUA level, (2) spam detection as a low priority
> > background process on the MTA and (3) the sending of discard notices to
> > forged envelope from addresses.
> >    
>
> What you are describing is group 1.
>  
No.

> (1) To rule out spam detection at the MUA is to say "we know better than
> you" to the recipient. so is firmly group 1.
>  
No.  Examples:

1)You've never heard of Sieve?
I'm in the third group.  With Sieve, my mail provider can give me total 
control over what it accepts on my behalf.
My http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-elvey-refuse-sieve-01.txt 
makes it easier for them to do so.
2)SpamAssassin with per-user config files also gives me total control 
over what it accepts on my behalf.
3)Can't procmail run at SMTP time?

> (2) Spam detection has to become priority at all steps MUA and MTA,
> currently its mostly at the MUA level some of that burden should be lifted.
I think few of us are in group 1 or 2, unless messages from people who 
can't be bothered to follow good practices are defined as not "important 
messages".
I'm in group 2 IF we define email that is not compliant with important 
RFCs and other important practices as not "important messages".
If you think you can get an "important message" from a poorly 
administered, readily abused system, e.g., an open relay, then you're in 
the JHD group, whether you realize it or not.

Ref: groups:

1/ Those that believe Spam should be stopped at any cost
2/ Those that believe Spam should be countered but not at the expense of
losing possibly important messages



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