Re: [Asrg] SHEESH!

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> From: "Chris Lewis" <clewis@nortelnetworks.com>

> ...
> > Maybe so or maybe not.  Using the DCC to reject all bulk mail would
> > prune a lot of conference announcements and calls for papers.  I think
> > that would be a good thing, but I know others disagree with me.
>
> Not _inbound_ to the IETF.
>
> Only if they spammed it, got DCC reports, and then forwarded to the IETF 
> would it get blocked.  Which is what you want, no?

I don't understand.

The right way to apply the DCC to IETF mailing lists would be with
addressee threasholds of 5 or at most 10 to allow a little cross-posting.
Any message received by an IETF SMTP server and sent to more than 5
or 10 addresses would be rejected as "unsolicited bulk" using 5 or 10
as the definition of "bulk" and the notion that no IETF mailing list
ever solicits any bulk mail.

CFPs are often bulkier than 5 or 10 when they first appear on an IETF
mailing list.  After one copy has been exploded on one IETF list, another
copy to another IETF list is likely to be a 100 or 1000 times bulkier.


Vernon Schryver    vjs@rhyolite.com


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]