nanog mailing list archives
Re: Anti-spam System Idea
From: Michael.Dillon () radianz com
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:24:44 +0000
To me, the approach you advocate is something like saying "do away with
any centralized
law enforcement, force everyone to carry guns, and if anyone suspects
that someone
else is committing a crime, they are obliged to shoot them." I believe
that blocking
spam at its source is far easier than blocking it at every possible
destination. The
less parties involved in blocking the spam, the higher the probability
that the spam
will be successfully blocked.
To do this you need to form a police force and a judiciary. Neither are possible in the absence of an organized society. The first step is for some of the larger senders/receivers of email to sit down around a table and form an email services consortium that can set "best current practice" standards and police those standards. This is something that network operators can do. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea, (continued)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Etaoin Shrdlu (Feb 15)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 15)
- Spam issue discussion lists [was Re: Anti-spam System Idea] Mark Jones (Feb 16)
- RE: Anti-spam System Idea Tim Thorpe (Feb 14)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Petri Helenius (Feb 14)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea W.D.McKinney (Feb 14)
- RE: Anti-spam System Idea Tim Thorpe (Feb 14)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 15)
- RE: Anti-spam System Idea Tim Thorpe (Feb 14)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Rainer Atkins (Feb 15)
- RE: Anti-spam System Idea Michael . Dillon (Feb 16)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Michael . Dillon (Feb 16)
- RE: Anti-spam System Idea Lawrence Baldwin (Feb 16)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Niels Bakker (Feb 16)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Joe St Sauver (Feb 16)