nanog mailing list archives
Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk () cybernothing org>
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 05:57:57 -0400
[Removed com-priv because I am not a member and because any thread between the two is bound to be a useless flamewar.] On Mon, May 26, 1997 at 01:51:38AM -0700, Matthew James Gering wrote:
And in the effort to allow the identification of spam, a required SMTP header: precedence: [ high | normal | low | bulk | uce ] This will allow policies to be enforced, and maintain the freedom of creating that policy.
Who will ensure that this requirement is followed? Right now we've got thousands of people using non-standard mail programs every day, and nobody has been able to get rid of Microsoft Exchange, Lotus Notes, or any of the other software which is known to do this.... ---------========== J.D. Falk <jdfalk () cybernothing org> =========--------- | "Anyway the :// part is an 'emoticon' representing | | a man with a strip of sticky tape across his mouth." | | -- R. Douglas | ----========== http://www.cybernothing.org/jdfalk/home.html ==========---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs, (continued)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs J.D. Falk (May 26)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Tony Torzillo (May 27)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Kent W. England (May 28)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs J.D. Falk (May 28)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Sean M. Doran (May 29)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs John M. Brown (May 24)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Owen DeLong (May 27)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Dory Ethan Leifer (May 28)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Owen DeLong (May 27)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Dave O'Shea (May 24)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Matthew James Gering (May 26)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs J.D. Falk (May 26)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Russell Nelson (May 26)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Curt Howland (May 27)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Vadim Antonov (May 29)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs Kent W. England (May 29)
- Re: Murkowski anti-spam bill could be a problem for ISPs John McCann (May 30)