[170563] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Mon Mar 31 00:17:48 2014
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <20140330204006.GA30533@besserwisser.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 00:17:19 -0400
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--Apple-Mail=_BCE4032B-DDAF-4E2E-A9B4-B8B518D6075F
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=iso-8859-1
On Mar 30, 2014, at 16:40 , M=E5ns Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org> =
wrote:
> Subject: Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Date: =
Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 11:06:11AM -0400 Quoting Patrick W. Gilmore =
(patrick@ianai.net):
>>> On Mar 29, 2014, at 3:15, M=E5ns Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org> =
wrote:
>>> Quoting John R. Levine (johnl@iecc.com):
>>>>> Ergo, ad hominem. Please quit doing that.
>>>>> As a side note I happen to run my own mail server without spam =
filters
>>>>> -- it works for me. I might not be the norm, but then again, is =
there
>>>>> really a norm? (A norm that transcends SMTP RFC reach, that is --
>>>>=20
>>>> I know a lot of people who run a lot of mail systems, and let's =
just
>>>> say you're so far out in the long tail we need a telescope to see
>>>> you.
>>>=20
>>> I will not debate with people who resort to humiliation techniques
>>> when questioned.
>>=20
>> I will not argue whether you were humiliated as that is something =
only you can decide.
>=20
> The puny attempt at "master suppression technique"[0] was identified
> as such and countermeasures were launched. No damage done.
I was serious. Your reaction .. well, I shouldn't say anything more lest =
you call me puny again. (What were you saying about humiliation =
techniques? Glad to see you would never be hypocritical.)
>> However, John was still factually correct. No big deal, lots of =
people are humiliated by facts. Although I admit I didn't find the quote =
above terribly humiliating myself.=20
>=20
> You have a point. Further, I do not debate the truth in the statement. =
My
> personal email system IS small -- I did even state that -- but that =
does
> not mean I do not run larger systems for others, nor does it mean that
> the general public should dismiss my ideas and only listen to people
> who brag about their acquaintances. There are other much more =
compelling
> reasons not to do as I say.=20
You misunderstand. Or perhaps I did?
I read John's statement to be in reference to your stance, i.e. running =
without spam filters. Not that your server is small.
John can clarify if he likes. But either way, running without spam =
filters is beyond unusual these days.
My personal server is run with very few filters, all of which REJECT or =
accept and send to a box I read. I have no "spam folder". So while I am =
not as far down the tail as you are, I am definitely out of the =
mainstream. The only reason I mention that is so you don't go =
researching for another reason to "identify" my comments as anything =
except exactly what they say.
>> Also, realize that John has already done more to stop spam in his =
career then you and your thousand closest friends ever will. (E.g. Look =
up abuse.net.) Again not humiliation, just a fact.
>>=20
>> Feel free to plonk me as well. I won't be humiliated. :-)
>=20
> I won't. There is a clear divide between politely pointing out facts
> and abusing facts to tell people that their opinion does not matter.
>=20
> And, for the record, I do not support spamming in any form. But the
> mitigation techniques MUST NOT impose undue constraints on the =
legitimate
> use of e-mail, even when it is not vetted by passing it through big
> insecure monitored US webmail providers.
I like your use of MUST.
However, I think you'll find your definition of "undue" and most of the =
rest of the Internet's is vastly different.
--=20
TTFN,
patrick
--Apple-Mail=_BCE4032B-DDAF-4E2E-A9B4-B8B518D6075F
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTOOxPAAoJEHZX8udmu5TX7OwIAINhV56e1Bo/WHDg1KldUY8w
2XmY5n9LNiTZW9/9rjfM7IveBdHHjrd73+g3A9qTndmXxDmFhL7VbdgVdaIXC0Mq
ZxJM1zhnmMNf7iJaHtj7g6pzCFmwQjhMZSpVXlJ9bAtLVyXWpOp6e5swVYCzlEyz
f/mC6hAYs725JC58U3cMiD/XFjA5YLho0Vxv9PiCCIKrSv6X7ElBNIPbKZScPLQG
7r3jEFv80R+X0JCaR1fRjL0hTlsJJHZV4ey0V/oEo2PmBUzqYrDGv/G0V+Pz0v4v
V96SwVBd5wqoujBoocdwH5L6shnnUPYTBBOzOLVpJZ2VzEoyb30NtRO42iTH/TA=
=jb+P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_BCE4032B-DDAF-4E2E-A9B4-B8B518D6075F--
