nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP
From: "John Levine" <johnl () iecc com>
Date: 26 Mar 2014 04:50:29 -0000
But, as always, I'm not holding my breath.Is spam fighting really about SMTP? Or is it about abuse of the transport layer by (among other things) the SMTP?
I don't think that your typical spam recipient cares how the spam got into her inbox. Anyone who has any familiarity with large scale mail systems knows that the only way to have any hope of effective spam filtering, in any medium, is to combine all the clues you can get. For mail, the source of the message is a highly useful clue. R's, John
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 address literals probably aren't SMTP either, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 address literals probably aren't SMTP either John R. Levine (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Owen DeLong (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Franck Martin (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Owen DeLong (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Tony Finch (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Jimmy Hess (Mar 25)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Dave Crocker (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Jeff Kell (Mar 25)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP John Levine (Mar 25)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Barry Shein (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Dave Crocker (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Barry Shein (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Blake Hudson (Mar 27)