Subject: RE: [Asrg] A New Plan for No Spam / Velocity Indicator

From: "Eric D. Williams" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 10:32:34 -0400

Unfortunately, some MUA do not support that 'feature' or only support it for 
mailing addresses within the domain of the originator which is also an 
interesting feature.  With that as the case it may be considered that BCC is 
not per se relevant as an 'evil' descriptor when detected but could be 
considered as a message anomaly when crossing an MTA boundary and:

1) the message recipient is within the domain of the originator, and;
2) all BCC recipients are outside the domain of the key recipient's (To and Cc)

as opposed to the converse which would appear to be the most likely use of BCC 
in message (company/organization internal) while these are interesting 
considerations, they may not be viable as solutions unless a mechanism can be 
established and used that identifies orig/recip affiliations (C/R, 
white/blacklists, etc).  To me this represents one of the problems with 
focusing on 'one-size-fits-all' solution approaches (and mind you I am 
interested in reading and analyzing all approaches).

On Thursday, May 01, 2003 6:52 AM, Tom Thomson 
[SMTP:[email-masked]] wrote:
8<...>8
> As for the bcc case, I used to use an MUA which generated n+1 copies of the
> body - 1 for each bcc recipient containing a bcc line with only that
> recipient, and one for all To and cc recipient containing no bcc line. These
> were transmitted separately - multiple Rcpt To lines with one Data phase for
> teh To and cc recipients, single Rcpt lines with a data phase for each bcc
> recipient. Since Phill is as much of an antique as I am, maybe he too
> remembers MUAs which did rather pleasant and intelligent things that didn't
> conform to the modern desire for "efficiency" at all costs (even at the cost
> of effectiveness) and maybe that's where theerrorneous statement comes from.
> An easy mistake to make if you grew up with civilised MUAs.
8<...>8

(pining for the old day's Tom? ;-)

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

---

From: "Tom Thomson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 17:04:25 +0100

On 02 May 2003 at 15:33 Eric D. Williams [mailto:[email-masked]] wrote:-
<...snip...>
> (pining for the old day's Tom? ;-)

Oh, yes, definitely.  10 years ago I didn't have a spam problem (that's not
to say I didn't receive any spam, but it was much less than 1% of my email),
web sites were rather better designed (shorter download times - even on
slower dial-up links),  most usenet newsgroups contained a high (by today's
standards) proportion of sane messages, software bloat was only beginning,
the papers I was asked to review were mostly publishable, and the USPO
hadn't quite sunk to its current depths of idiocy.

I would miss Google if the clock were turned back, though.

Tom