On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, John Hardin wrote:
Both would have to be done any time a new address was added to the
mailing list. And there would have to be some watchdog ensuring the MSP
doesn't relax the policy over time.
Uh-huh. For a -4 in my mail filter? They oughta! :)
It's a great idea. The problem is, how do you get mail service providers to
do this? What causes them loss of revenue if they _don't_ do it?
The fact that recipients change their SA score from negative to positive
(or better still, as argued here, the negative *default* is removed from
the distribution, so that millions of mail servers immediately 'downgrade'
the mail's acceptability).
I'm sure we would all live with the occasional true 'opt-in' request,
Absolutely, particulary if it's the proper "ignore means permission denied"
model.
That's my definition of 'true opt-in'. Yes.
Also goes without saying that the opt-in request be *terse* and not be
used as a 'carrier' for 'one quick sneaky ad'. Plain text. No logos.
I don't think it would have that effect. Being able to force such a policy
onto MSPs won't affect spambot networks.
Which leads around to the other issue that seems to be building, which is
whether spambot networks deliberately target whitelisted IP ranges to
improve their chances of getting delivery..... :(
- C
