[51194] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IETF SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brad Knowles)
Wed Aug 21 19:03:02 2002
In-Reply-To: <003501c2492a$68fd73d0$6f00000a@z0.inoc.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 23:21:42 +0200
To: "Robert Blayzor" <rblayzor@inoc.net>, <davei@algx.net>
From: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>
Cc: <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
At 11:50 AM -0400 2002/08/21, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> Well yes, it could be done with certificates, but it can also be done
> via some type of "root server" system like DNS uses. A database
> distributed among many root servers from the registrars is proven.
Look. The DNS is seriously screwed-up enough as it is. Let's
not take a bad model and replicate it elsewhere.
> Tracking valid servers seems much easier to track rather than
> blacklisting IP's that are not mail servers at all or are abusive
> servers.
Sure. Only accept e-mail from white-listed servers. You don't
need a complex system to manage that.
> IMHO I don't think it would be that horrible of an idea with
> the right amount of notification and education to state something such
> as "register your mail servers by this date or risk service
> interruption".
Sure. Are you willing to be the first?
--
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E W+++(--) N+ !w---
O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
