> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Shmuel Metz > Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 3:26 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [marf] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-marf-as-05 > > >Probably, yes - while on the modern net it would probably make much > >more sense to centralize most the processing and decision making, > > I agree, but in the short run there will continue to be providers that > don't provide that function. > > >I think anyone developing an MUA to do that sort of thing would either > >deeply understand this document and read it from an appropriate > >perspective, or not understand it and need to be restrained from doing > >anything along these lines. > > The refusal of, e.g., yahoo, to accept plain text complaints provides > an incentive for MUA authors to write such tools. Given the number of > e-mail clients that are broken in one way or another, I'd rather see > some guidance in an RFC before the avalanche starts. Restraining the > MUA authors is not feasible.
What do others think about this point? Given the number of direct complaints John, Yakov and I got from Yahoo members when Yahoo decided to accept only ARF reports, it seems like we might be able to say we have experience that this creates a big problem for a lot of people. And it's true that software to generate ARFs will start appearing, if it hasn't already. That said, I don't think we need to talk specifically about MUAs sending abuse reports. It seems to me any advice we have for them is the same as the advice we're already giving to report generators. Why would it be any different? -MSK _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
