 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see a problem if we eat our own dog food.
The use of tdma type tech for mailing list subscriptions has been considered best practice for over a decade. Personal use is nasty, brutish and hopefully short.
Allowing unsubscribed persons to post after a tdma authentication is a courtesy, there is no obligation to extend it in the first place.
Pooling the tdma responses across multiple ietf mailing lists is a further courtesy.
There is more we can do here but no more that we should feel obliged to do - ecept for the fact that we are a standards organization and should eat the dog food.
In particular, sign the messages with dkim and deploy spf.
Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com)
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Thomas [mailto:mat at cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 08:23 AM Pacific Standard Time
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: ietf at ietf.org
Subject: Re: Spammers answering TMDA Queries
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Speaking personally, I think annual reconfirmation is quite reasonable.
> The message sent to the user should make it clear that it is an
> annual process.
Except... the annual confirmation is probably going to get accidentally
deleted by a lot of people because they think it's the monthly notice.
If this is a real problem, wouldn't it be better to take it up with the
mailman
folks since I'd expect that it's not just ietf? I've been working with
them on
dkim related stuff and they are quite reasonable folks. Maybe they have some
ideas on this front.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.