Subject: [Asrg] draft-crocker-spam-techconsider

From: Florian Weimer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 21:00:36 +0200

In general, I think the intention of the document and the document
itself is *very* helpful.

Regarding the definition of "spam", I think it's important to note
that other things are reducing the usability of email.  While spam
control cannot aim for a complete solution to all email problems, it
seems to me that the majority of schemes can address annoying (often:
bulk) mail messages beyond what's commonly summed up as "spam".  For
example, reliable sender tracing might help to track down MTAs sending
erroneous bounces (to header addresses) on huge mailing lists, and
many schemes also work against worms propagating via email.

A further evaluation point (or a more specific way of looking at the
costs) is required.  On the Internet of today, ISPs and ISP personnel
who try to limit the amount of spam originating from their networks
are punished by multiple sides (spam fighting requires additional
hardware and staff, and you mainly reduce your customer base)---and
yet those who invest in spam control mechanisms despite all the
disadvantages (here I'm still talking about outgoing email) receive no
bonus by the current control mechanisms at the receiver side if
something goes wrong (and you can never quite avoid this, of course).

On the other hand, I think that systems which rely just on cooperation
by the receiving side or the originating end user discard a lot of
potential.  The fact that some ISPs (well, usually a few crazy
employees) fight spam at the originating side suggests that there are
resources available, even though these efforts have not a sufficient
impact on the global spam level at the moment.  Maybe this leads to
another evaluation criterion: who can support the system and whose
cooperation is required?

Finally, a rule of thumb I find pretty handy at times: does the system
actually reduce the amount of email that has to be transmitted and
read by end users?  Fighting spam by generating more mail messages is
quite insane, but many people think its a solution because they chose
a restricted, local point of view.

Some typographical errors: Search for "" (verbatim), you'll see the
problem.  I guess "UsageOnce" is a typo, too.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg