Subject: Re: [Asrg] Legal Suggestions ....

From: "John Fenley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 18:23:09 -0600

============         =============        ===========
|   SENDER   |       | THIRD PARTY |      |  RECIEVER |
| (and isp)  |<=====>| (internet)  |<====>| (and isp) |
============         =============        ===========

The third party should not block mail.
John Fenley

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

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

---

From: "Alan DeKok" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 09:56:59 -0400

Why not?  They do so today, for short periods at least.  It's called
congestion control.  There's no guarantee that *any* packets will make
it from the sender to the receiver.  It's just common practice that
*most* packets do make it.

  What I would say is that the third party should not treat email
differently than any other network protocol, unless specifically
requested to by the receiver.

  Alan DeKok.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:41:07 -0400

On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 06:23:09PM -0600, John Fenley wrote

  One clarification; in this scenario, "THIRD PARTY" is either an
upstream of "RECIEVER" ISP, or a peer through whom traffic flows.

  DNSbls like Osirusoft and SPEWS are not physically capable of doing
any blocking.  DNSbls are 3rd parties *WHO ARE CONSULTED BY "RECIEVER
(and/or isp)"*.  The final decision to block/not-block is never made by
a DNSbl, it is made by the party that consults the DNSbl.  Local lists
or policies can and do override the DNSbl's *RECOMMENDATION*.

-- 
Walter Dnes <[email-masked]>
An infinite number of monkeys pounding away on keyboards will
eventually produce a report showing that Windows is more secure,
and has a lower TCO, than linux.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: Vernon Schryver <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 20:29:56 -0600 (MDT)

> From: [email-masked]

> or policies can and do override the DNSbl's *RECOMMENDATION*.

What happens when a transit provider uses the BGP feed of the RBL(tm)?
Is it not possible for the transit provider not have any contract or
even contact with either the "SENDER (and isp)" or "RECIEVER (and isp)"?
Didn't something that almost but didn't quite fit that scenario happen
with Above.net and "SENDER (and isp)" in New Zealand?

My suggestion is to leave the lawyering to the lawyers, including the
familiar controversy over whether DNS blacklists only recommend and
never block.  Even if we get the lawyering right, the lawyers will
insist on re-doing it.

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

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 08:55:49 -0400

On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 08:29:56PM -0600, Vernon Schryver wrote

> What happens when a transit provider uses the BGP feed of the RBL(tm)?

  In this case, there can be a legal claim if a contract was broken.