nanog mailing list archives
Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition
From: Lamar Owen <lowen () pari edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 10:07:22 -0400
On 03/25/2014 10:51 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
[snip] I would suggest the formation of an "IPv6 SMTP Server operator's club," with a system for enrolling certain IP address source ranges as "Active mail servers", active IP addresses and SMTP domain names under the authority of a member.
... As has been mentioned, this is old hat.There is only one surefire way of doing away with spam for good, IMO. No one is currently willing to do it, though.
That way? Make e-mail cost; have e-postage. No, I don't want it either. But where is the pain point for spam where this becomes less painful? If an enduser gets a bill for sending several thousand e-mails because they got owned by a botnet they're going to do something about it; get enough endusers with this problem and you'll get a class-action suit against OS vendors that allow the problem to remain a problem; you can get rid of the bots. This will trim out a large part of spam, and those hosts that insist on sending unsolicited bulk e-mail will get billed for it. That would also eliminate a lot of traffic on e-mail lists, too, if the subscribers had to pay the costs for each message sent to a list; I wonder what the cost would be for each post to a list the size of this one. If spam ceases to be profitable, it will stop.
Of course, I reserve the right to be wrong, and this might all just be a pipe dream. (and yes, I've thought about what sort of billing infrastructure nightmare this could be.....)
Current thread:
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition, (continued)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition John R. Levine (Mar 25)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 25)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Jimmy Hess (Mar 25)
- RE: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition MailPlus| David Hofstee (Mar 26)
- RE: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Naslund, Steve (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition John Levine (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Matthias Leisi (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Rich Kulawiec (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Rob McEwen (Mar 25)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Jimmy Hess (Mar 25)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Lamar Owen (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Laszlo Hanyecz (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition John Levine (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Scott Buettner (Mar 27)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Laszlo Hanyecz (Mar 27)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition John Levine (Mar 27)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Rich Kulawiec (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition John Levine (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Lamar Owen (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Tony Finch (Mar 26)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Lamar Owen (Mar 26)