I agree that a size limit would be appropriate, especially if it also applied to the main list, but maybe even if it did not. On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Randy Presuhn wrote: > Hi - > > > Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 11:50:23 -0500 (EST) > > From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu> > > To: ietf@ietf.org > > Cc: iesg@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: namedroppers mismanagement, continued > > In-Reply-To: <20021127155832.12772.qmail@cr.yp.to> > > Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10211271147380.7561-100000@spitfire.law.miami.edu> > .... > > Regardless of the specifics of this case, I think a good rule would be to > > say that all bounced messages on any IETF list MUST be archived on a > > separate 'bounced' list. To whom would this suggestion best be directed? > .... > > As someone who has maintained a couple of WG mailing lists > for several years, I'd object to the imposition of such a > requirement. The amount of spam, especially *large* (megabyte > or more) viral messages, directed at WG mailing lists makes > keeping all the trash a highly unattractive proposition. > > (Much of the viral spam I see bears the forged addresses > of legitimate subscribers, so I have to resort to other > mechanisms to keep the lists clean.) > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Randy Presuhn BMC Software, Inc. SJC-1.3141 > randy_presuhn@bmc.com 2141 North First Street > Tel: +1 408 546-1006 San José, California 95131 USA > ------------------------------------------------------ > My opinions and BMC's are independent variables. > ------------------------------------------------------ > > -- Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin@law.tm U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA +1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm -->It's warm here.<--