[122817] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Email Portability Approved by Knesset Committee
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Bellovin)
Mon Feb 22 11:25:54 2010
From: Steven Bellovin <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1002221617500.20747@castor.opentrend.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:25:19 -0500
To: Robert Brockway <robert@timetraveller.org>
Cc: NANOG Operators Group <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 22, 2010, at 11:24 AM, Robert Brockway wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, James Jones wrote:
>=20
>> Why does this seem like a really bad idea?
>=20
> While I think the principal is noble there are operational problems:
>=20
> 1) Large and increasing quantity of email will be forwarded between =
Israeli ISPs, loading their networks with traffic that could have been =
avoided.
>=20
> 2) Every time someone changes ISP and wants to continue using this =
address they will need to notify their original ISP, who they may not =
have had a business relationship with for many years. This will be a =
significant operational challenge I expect. How do you confirm the =
person notifying you is the real owner of the address, for example?
>=20
> IMHO it would have been better to require the ISPs to forward the =
email for a reasonable period of time (say 3 months) to allow the user =
to make relevant notifications (or just stop using an ISP bound email =
address).
>=20
> Unfortunately the links cited are in Hebrew so I'm only going on =
Gadi's report here.
>=20
Bring back the MB or MR DNS records? (Only half a smiley.)
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
