[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Asrg] Spam, defined, and permissions
I'm not sure I understand something completely...
In order for a paid postage system to work, ISPs would need to
block/control all mail transactions on their network. The logical way
to do this is to block port 25 and monitor and rate limit transactions
through the authorized servers.
But it seems to me that just blocking port 25 and monitoring and rate
limiting transactions through the authorized servers solves at least 90%
of the problem without charging anyone anything. If the outgoing mail
servers all had anti-virus scanning too, you'd make it very difficult to
spread viruses effectively too. Adding smtp-auth on top would make it
more difficult still. And instead of fining those that are spewing
viruses, you could just count each failed virus sent as an email attempt
and cut off their email at something like 500 messages as going over
their quota. That gives the users an incentive to clean up, while still
allowing the ISP a content-neutral mechanism for cutting off the bad apples.
So why aren't the advocates of email postage at least recommending this
as a first step?
(Just to be clear, I would only advocate mandatory port 25 blocking on
consumer-level accounts.)
--
James Lick -- éåæ -- jlick at jameslick.com -- http://jameslick.com/
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
- Prev by Date:
Re: [Asrg] mail metering, was Spam, defined, and permissions
- Next by Date:
Re: [Asrg] mail metering, was Spam, defined, and permissions
- Previous by thread:
Re: [Asrg] Spam, defined, and permissions
- Next by thread:
Re: [Asrg] Spam, defined, and permissions
- Index(es):