Subject: RE: [Asrg] 1a. Inventory of Problems - new spam channels

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:28:40 -0800

The spam problem is the result of a lack of accountability.

That lack of accountability tends to be the result of being part of an
Internet rather than a private network. 

So while Yakov makes a valid point these non email spam problems are
relevant because they occur because the protocol is used over a network of
networks rather than just a network.

Regardless of what happens in MARID people will take the same principles and
apply them. You can even recycle the same syntax and even the same RRs the
same way MX was generalized first to SRV and then to NAPTR.

Try to give the following a reasonable meaning that is not the one that is
intended.

_http._spf.example.com "TLS=always "
		"CA=SHA1:742C3192E607E424EB4549542BE1BBC53E6174E2=="

If the scheme is unambiguous enough to eliminate ambiguity we have a
solution. Let the market decide whether or not it wants to use it.

		Phill

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

---

From: Yakov Shafranovich <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 02:53:56 -0500

> same way MX was generalized first to SRV and then to NAPTR.

This brings to mind an interesting discussion. There has been some 
discussion at MXCOMP list, main IETF list, here and in the SMTP-VERIFY 
subgroup about trust, protocols for negotiating trust and querying third 
party reputation/accredidation providers to verify trust. This sounds 
like something that should be pursued at some point, maybe as a general 
non-email mechanism.

Yakov