[43953] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Bicknell)
Mon Oct 29 08:47:07 2001
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:46:09 -0500
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20011029084609.A9411@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@merit.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20011028212602.Q11120@haybaler.sackheads.org>; from john@sackheads.org on Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 09:26:02PM -0800
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 09:26:02PM -0800, John Payne wrote:
> I am trying to be good :) If you change one word in your definition...
> you cover the "small potential problem" (which has been seen already)
> without losing anything.
>
> Unsolicited Bulk E-mail.
I'm not sure I like the use of the word bulk. The reason is that
it is not precise. Is 10 bulk? 50? Is it only bulk if I use a
"spam tool"?
Unsolicited, Commercial, and E-mail all have precise definitions.
particularly if we're going to get something (eventually) into a
useful law I think we need to make sure it is entirely defined of
precise terms.
You do cite a good example of my "small potential problem". Nothing
immediately comes to mind as a good way to catch it without causing
good things to get caught up as well. I'm going to think about it.
--
Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
