[81479] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender ID Authentication......?]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Todd Vierling)
Mon Jun 13 10:59:24 2005
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 10:58:06 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
From: Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org>
To: Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <OF26383C21.87759858-ON8025701F.00302586-8025701F.00325D26@radianz.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com wrote:
> Here's a simple mechanism which has not yet been tried seriously. Email
> server peering.
All this stuff you're describing [almost] exactly matches the former
UUCP-based e-mail distribution mechanism.
> A lot of this dubious technical garbage can be swept aside
> if we simply recognize that the flat structure of a completely
> open SMTP service is not scalable.
But we already found that the UUCP system didn't scale because its
management load was way too high. That's why RFC821 exists!
We aren't rolling back the clock now -- the e-mail infrastructure is far too
large to do that.
(Oh sh*t, did I just feed a troll?)
--
-- Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> <tv@pobox.com> <todd@vierling.name>
