| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Problem with your 'Solution'Problem with your 'Solution'Posted May 6, 2004 15:55 UTC (Thu) by mmarsh (subscriber, #17029)In reply to: Problem with your 'Solution' by yodermk Parent article: 82% of email is spam
>First, I said to spend a few minutes thinking of a solution for any That's an unfair request. If it's all been thought of and debated before, provide a URL or something. You're making a proposal, so it's up to you to defend it. A capsule description provides insufficient detail to support a position or adequately describe a system. >Say a user of an ISP sends a million spams. All million (short) How is this different than a spam where the body is essentially just an image tag (or a redirect) to an advertisement on a remote server? Since notification latency will vary from recipient to recipient and not everyone checks email immediately on arrival, there might never be a noticeable spike. Combine that with an ISP that just doesn't care about bandwidth usage, and you're really no better off than when you started. >Also, all mail will need to go through some permanantly connected mail So email availability is dependant on the reliability of the sender? If the sender's ISP has to keep track of whether all of the recipients have retrieved the message, how does that affect forwarding? Will mail that gets forwarded be retrievable at all? Here I don't mean A sends a message to B who then forwards it to C. That's a no-brainer: B has to store it. I mean A sends a message to B at foo.com, but B has a .forward file passing it along to bar.com. I've had forwarding chains of about four hops, and I suspect there are many people with longer chains. Does each hop have to cache the message? What about messages of the type "Our server will be down for maintenance on Thursday"? If a recipient doesn't check mail on Wednesday, he'll see that there's a message waiting from him, possibly flagged as important, but he won't be able to retrieve it until it's no longer relevant.
(Log in to post comments)
Problem with your 'Solution' Posted May 6, 2004 23:37 UTC (Thu) by yodermk (subscriber, #3803) [Link] Dan Bernstein made the proposal, not me. Granted, his page isn't that detailed. If you Google for "IM2000" you can find a few other more specific proposals.> How is this different than a spam where the body is essentially just an image tag (or a redirect) to an advertisement on a remote server? That would still end up as an email in someone's box. An IM2000 spam would have a subject, but may be unavailable upon mail check. Even though that type of spam is "short", it's still far better that it never reaches the recipient, to make spamming less profitable. > Combine that with an ISP that just doesn't care about bandwidth usage I do think it would be detectable, and any ISP that simply didn't care would be blacklisted. > but B has a .forward file passing it along to bar.com. I've had forwarding chains of about four hops, and I suspect there are many people with longer chains. Does each hop have to cache the message? Couple possibilities ... 1) each hop caches the message, 2) each hop notifies the originating ISP of the new recipient. That may have privacy concerns though. > What about messages of the type "Our server will be down for maintenance on Thursday"? That would be something to think about. This really does depend on mail servers being reliable. But, for the most part, they are.
Problem with your 'Solution' Posted May 17, 2004 11:52 UTC (Mon) by coolian (guest, #14818) [Link] " Dan Bernstein made the proposal, not me."But you suggested it and said it would "of course" be the answer. If you don't have any actual knowledge of it, then how could you know it's the answer? Jesus, you must be 12.
|
|
||||||||||||