[81582] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alex Rubenstein)
Mon Jun 20 06:33:44 2005
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 06:31:55 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
From: Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net>
To: Joe St Sauver <JOE@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU>
Cc: bortzmeyer@nic.fr, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <01LPJ2EPBPFGFZLUZ3@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
> There's no reason why one couldn't build a comparable model for mail,
> with the SMTP speciality service provider offering "SMTP transit" to a
> base of trusted customers. This comparatively small number of SMTP
> speciality provider would then maintain good relations ("peerings") with
> the comparatively small number of major ISPs. Oh wait -- there are a
> variety of folks who are already specializing in doing that sort of
> thing -- it's just that most folks don't need to buy that sort of
> service (yet).
While this could work, we are mixing a format and content type that is not
security sensitive and is used to carry point to multipoint messages
(forums?) and media (NNTP), with a format and content type that is highly
sensitive, and is generally used to carry point-to-point communications
which may contain things like personal or financial information (SMTP).
I am not sure any level of security would make me feel good about passing
my emails through a 'peering .. core' of SMTP relays.
However, if we do go in this direction, I plan on firing up my old copies
of BinkleyTerm. FIDO and NetMail may be a good place to start :)
(Did I just date myself?)
--
Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex@nac.net, latency, Al Reuben
Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net
