[24916] in Cypherpunks
Re: for-pay remailers and FV (Was Re: Remailer Abuse)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathaniel Borenstein)
Fri Jan 6 18:00:13 1995
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 17:39:06 -0500 (EST)
From: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com>
To: Jonathan Rochkind <jrochkin@cs.oberlin.edu>,
"James A. Donald" <jamesd@netcom.com>
Cc: nelson@crynwr.com, cypherpunks@toad.com
In-Reply-To: <4715.789430801.1@nsb.fv.com>
Excerpts from fv: 6-Jan-95 Re: for-pay remailers and F.. "James A.
Donald"@netcom (1127*)
> On Fri, 6 Jan 1995, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> > Hmm. Maybe I don't completely understand how this is going to work, but
> > won't _every_ remailer in the chain need to know your FV billing account?
> First remailer knows you and your FV billing account. Charges you
> its own fee and the fee for all for profit remailers in the list.
> (The envelope states what this fee is going to be)
> Second remailer charges first remailer.
> Third remailer charges second remailer.
> If the postage on the envelope is insufficient to cover all
> the for profit remailers the message passes through, it gets
> bounced or dropped.
> In principle it could work,
Yes, I think you've probably just identified a *second* way it could
work. I agree it's awfully complex, though. I'd prefer my consortium
approach, but it's nice to see that multiple models are possible. --
Nathaniel
