On 2008-04-14 23:11 Ned Freed said the following:
>> +1 to Henrik's comments. I don't think the two MUSTs
>> that he comments on are algorithmically possible.
>
> These two MUSTs (the ability to whitelist specific posters without them having
> to receive list mail and spam rejection) are both completely trivial to
> implement with our software. The latter is normally done (and definitely
> should
> be done) at the SMTP level, minimizing blowback.
What you describe above is feasible and reasonable. What the posted text seems
to require isn't, in my opinion.
> I spend essentially no time these days with other messaging software but I'm
> having a great deal of trouble believing this would be in any way difficult to
> implement with something else. This is all stuff that lots of lists have done
> for years - it doesn't even come close to rocket science.
Humm. You're able to provide guaranteed bypass of moderation without human
evaluation, and without inspecting spam? That's what my post was about, and
if you can do it, I'm impressed.
Henrik
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
