Subject: [Fwd: Re: 3. Requirements - Anonimity (was Re: FW: [Asrg] 0. General)]

From: Dennis Gearon <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:43:20 -0800

Soooooo many of the lists I'm on have the reply-to header munged to the 
list that I forget to press the 'reply to all' button.

Subject: Re: 3. Requirements - Anonimity (was Re: FW: [Asrg] 0. General)
From: Dennis Gearon <[email-masked]>
To: "Jonathan A. Zdziarski" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:39:55 -0800

Jonathan A. Zdziarski wrote:

>>How about an XML standard that defined ways that a mail server could 
>>accept/bounce/drop down a canyon/etc emails? The users uploads the file 
>>and voila, enforcement happens while email client is offline. Of course, 
>>it needs a nice SIMPLE GUI, etc.
>>    
>>
>
>XML is pretty bandwidth intensive though, as compared to some smaller
>protocol.  If this were to become a widely accepted standard, an
>architecture might emerge where you could have 100 "dumb" mail servers,
>and one or two "policy servers" for lack of a better name.  In that
>case, you'd want to have the most lightweight protocol for communicating
>between them.   Maybe XML will work... hmm.
>  
>
This XML file  only gets transmitted when the user changes his/her 
policy. It resides for the most part, unchanged on the user's email 
server, telling the mail server the mail user's wishes by 'proxy'.