Re: e2e

[Michael Thomas <mat at cisco.com>]

Keith Moore wrote:
> > > this is  not a way to make the network more robust.
> > >   
> > >       
> > Robust for what? Spammers? The simple fact of the matter is that the
> > alternative is to just shut down port 25 given the growth in both volume
> > and complexity to filter.  That ain't robust either. Dealing with false
> > positives is the cost of doing business on the internet these days.
> > Welcome
> > to reality.
> >     
> people who cite "reality" generally do so because they lack
> justification for their statements.
>   

The thing is, Keith, I don't lack justification. I've seen the numbers with
my own eyes in our own largish organization with an IT staff that's
super paranoid about about false positives (free clue: guess who some of
our customers undoubtedly are?)
> find a way to make reputation servers accountable to both sender and
> recipient, then we can talk about robustness.  until then, they're just
> another form of DoS attack.
>   

Attacking people in the field as "DoS attackers" who are just trying to
get by given the escalating onslaught is... something. In that Cluepon
short of a Happy Meal kind of way.

      Mike

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