Subject: [Asrg] 4.a Taxonomy -- Where would CHANNELS fit into the Taxonomy ?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 10:49:06 -0700

Bob Hall at ATT Labs created a system called channels

	http://www.research.att.com/~hall/channels-project.html

where proof of consent is in the form of a unguessable email address
called a CHANNEL.  (Our system, ZoEmail is based on this approach.)

A person would have an infinite set of email addresses and could give
out a different one to each person or group of people and could revoke
any  email addresses that go onto a spam list with only tell one (or a
few) of his correspondents to change addresses.  

Would this fall into that taxonomy at 

       1 (a) (i) (2) c  Disposable email addresses 

since this system does contain Disposable email addresses, but they
aren't generally meant to be "use once addresses" and users don't
think of them as disposable.

or at 

       1 (a) (i) (2) b Token supported

since CHANNEL seems to be a token.

It seems different enough to me that perhaps should it be on a new
additional line, perhaps  under

       1 (a) (iii) Consent Tokens (a priori consent)

as

       1 (a) (iii) (3) proof of prior contact / address embedded tokens 

since a sender's knowledge of a CHANNEL-ID is proof of consent (or of
contact with someone who has received consent).

Also the channel system gives us some ability to track where a spammer
has gotten the address from since any given CHANNEL is legitimately
known to very few (often just one) person.

I don't know where systems in general that track accountability (much
like contagion) would fit into the taxonomy.

/Russell 

[standard disclaimer: ZoEmail LLC has licensed the Channels system
from AT&T including US #5,930,479]
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: Vernon Schryver <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 12:47:08 -0600 (MDT)

> From: [email-masked]

> ...

I think sendmail has supported +tagging for more than 17 years, and
certainly since long before 1996.

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

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 14:56:43 -0700

Vernon,

For the moment, my goal is to figure out where CHANNELS fit into the
taxonomy.  I presume that that is independent of whether the patent is
valid or not; though I imagine that such questions about patent are
probably important to the business folks within ZoEmail.  I had
included the disclaimer only to fulfill the spirit of the disclosure
as per RFC 2026.

That said, my understanding of the patent issue goes like this.

While the +tagging is in fact old, the use of it in ANDREW system
where I believe it originated, was disclosed in the patent application
and hence the patent office doesn't consider it disqualifying prior
art.  The patent as granted has some explicit discussion of this that
you can read if you like.

And I suppose the standard disclaimer for this explanation is "I am
not a lawyer and don't even play one on TV"

/best thoughts
Russell