Re: Email Portability Approved by Knesset Committee

[Cian Brennan <cian.brennan () redbrick dcu ie>]

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:30:53AM -0600, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 2/22/2010 10:24 AM, Robert Brockway wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, James Jones wrote:
> >
> > > Why does this seem like a really bad idea?
> >
> > While I think the principal is noble there are operational problems:
>
> I dare say.
>
> I own example.  I fire George for a long list of foul deeds.  He goes to
> work for another company and writes email from george () example com that
> injures my reputation.
>
> Not a good plan at all.
>
> > 1) Large and increasing quantity of email will be forwarded between 
> > Israeli ISPs, loading their networks with traffic that could have been 
> > avoided.
>
> Believe it or not, some people have email addresses that are not
> intrinsically "ISP" addresses.
>
> > 2) Every time someone changes ISP and wants to continue using this address 
> > they will need to notify their original ISP, who they may not have had a 
> > business relationship with for many years.  This will be a significant 
> > operational challenge I expect.  How do you confirm the person notifying 
> > you is the real owner of the address, for example?
>
> Again, it might all be within one ISP--and is still irrelevant.
Actually, this is really simple to fix. Don't provide smtp service, only
pop/imap. Then they never need to contact you. At least one Irish ISP already
does something similar for ex-subscribers.

> > IMHO it would have been better to require the ISPs to forward the email 
> > for a reasonable period of time (say 3 months) to allow the user to make 
> > relevant notifications (or just stop using an ISP bound email address).
>
> Governments requiring people to do things that are not good ideas often
> have unexpected (even if obvious) consequences.
>
> My reaction, if I were in a position to do so, would be to stop
> providing email addresses.
>
> > Unfortunately the links cited are in Hebrew so I'm only going on Gadi's 
> > report here.
>
> Why is that relevant?
>
> -- 
> "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to
> take everything you have."
>
> Remember:  The Ark was built by amateurs, the Titanic by professionals.
>
> Requiescas in pace o email
> Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
> Eppure si rinfresca
>
> ICBM Targeting Information:  http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
> http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
>       

-- 

--