Subject: RE: DNS Choices: Was: [ietf-dkim] Re: Last Call: 'DomainKeys

From: "Nelson, David" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 12:07:25 -0500

Phillip Hallam-Baker writes...

> I agree that this demonstrates that the 'charge per email' 
> schemes that people have don't work.

I'm not so sure about that.  The fact that there is a real cost
certainly changes the dynamics of unsolicited mail, as well as the
business model of the purveyors.  Cost factors will not eliminate it,
but it might improve the "quality" of the offers and reduce the quantity
of messages.

> But if postal mail recipients could impose filters they would.

Indeed.

> And there is in point of fact an entire police force tracking 
> down scam artists using the postal mail.

Right.

One additional distinction is that most unsolicited mail in the US
(typically called junk mail) is mailed at discounted bulk postage rates.
In order to mail at bulk rates, an organization needs a permit from the
post office.  This involves some level of "authentication".  Of course,
mail sent at first class or second class postage rates can be sent
anonymously.  However, I get very (very) few pieces of junk mail sent at
first or second class rates.  It's all bulk rate mail.  This is another
example of the cost of mailing driving the behavior set.

A second distinction is that the US Postal System (in the US) is a
government sanctioned monopoly, and in many countries the postal system
is still a government agency.  When you have a single entity acting as
the receiver of all outgoing mail, it makes it much easier to enforce
policies regarding cost and "authentication".  In that regard,
snail-mail is not a very good analogy for e-mail discussions.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Peter Sherbin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 18:53:02 -0800 (PST)

> snail-mail is not a very good analogy for e-mail discussions.

The basic premise is all the same: user -> need to send -> delivery charge.
Fee collector does not matter: US Post, UPS, FedEx, DHL, Purolator or ISP.

> snail-mail is not a very good analogy for e-mail discussions.

____________________________________________________________________________________
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com.  Try it now.

---

From: "Nelson, David" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 10:24:59 -0500

Peter Sherbin writes...
 
> Fee collector does not matter: US Post, UPS, FedEx, DHL, 

Yes, but my point was that it would be relatively difficult to subvert a
post office employee or insert mail into the postal system by bypassing
the post office.  I'm not so sure that the analogous properties hold for
ISPs and the Internet.  There are just too many ways to get attached,
and inject traffic.  Assuming that all ISPs would comply with both the
spirit and letter of the rule, in this regard, is perhaps naive.