Re: [Asrg] About that e-postage draft [POSTAGE]

[Paul Russell <prussell at nd.edu>]

On 2/16/2009 12:04 PM, John Leslie wrote:
> I do think it wise for the "bank" to ask what receiving MTA the token is 
> destined for, but it seems to me that
> 
> - whether it actually encodes that in the token, and
> - whether it tells the receiving MTA how to decode it
> 
> are issues we shouldn't specify yet.

In other words, the sender must buy a seperate "stamp" for each message sent,
at the time the message is sent.  This precludes "buying a book of stamps"
or "filling the postage meter", and using the postage, as needed, over time.

The suggestion from Benjamin April <ben at stagecraft.net> that an e-postage token
should have an opaque value makes sense to me.

-- 
Paul Russell, Senior Systems Administrator
OIT Messaging Services Team
University of Notre Dame
prussell at nd.edu