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

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

> I said! "filter, but not at the expense of missing important emails".

Well...close enough.

> How does that become "turn off the filters"?

You have repeatedly said that spam filtering must be done at the MUA.
>From Chris Lewis' perspective, which is that of an MTA operator, that's
"turn off the filters", because it demands that everything be let
through to _reach_ the MUA.

I can provide quotes if necessary, but there are many of them and I
suspect most of the list isn't interested in seeing them.

And, a small tip: Arguing spamfiltering in a business environment with
Chris Lewis is a bit like arguing computer science with Knuth: if you
disagree, you are very probably wrong.

> My argument is and will always be KILL OFF all obvious spam

...which you seem curiously reluctant to define in anything but a
handwaving way.  In one message I have handy you write that `[o]bvious
spam would have to fall into the category of messages from forged
source addresses, messages containing viruses and I am sure their[sic]
are plenty of other "absolutes" which can be included.'.

Take the scenario you proposed and now let that "idiot" typo an MUA
configuration entry, thereby having it generate mail from the wrong
domain.  Forged from.  Toss (or whatever "KILL OFF" means).

...oops.

Would, to ask your question back to you, your job be safe?

> I said "Now say the ASRG comes up with a filtering system that takes
> that control away from you."

> The control may be taken away from you because a remote administrator
> implements the "filtering system".  Therefore mail destined for you,
> that passes through that remote MTA is under their control not yours.
> even though the mail is intended for you.

This already is, has been, and probably always will be, the case: other
MTAs handle messages, and while they handle them, they are under their
control.

No matter how important the message might have been, if it was filtered
by a system not under Chris's control, it's not Chris's fault.  (I
wouldn't _want_ to work for someone unable to comprehend that!)

> P.S. your mail only got through because I manually filtered. the "to"
> address was left blank a common enough spam trigger.

Your point being?  If you use spammishness tests that
false-positive-prone, you will get a lot of false positives.  This too
is, has been, and will continue to be true.

/~\ 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