Re: MTAmark (was: MTX plugin functionally complete?)
At 02:56 15-02-10, Per Jessen wrote: I went to google mtamark, and came across a few discussions on mailing lists (e.g. at www.sage.org) as well as an article in iX (German IT magazine) in 2005. The proposal was certainly discussed quite a bit, but it's not very clear what then happened. I also saw a few links to personal pages at space.net, but they're long gone. There is experimental support for MTAMARK in a well-known MTA. The proposal had less exposure than SPF. Regards, -sm
Re: MTAMark Re: MTX plugin functionally complete?
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote: I have to say keep in mind that MTAMark does not tie the spam to a domain, and MTX does, which makes it easier to track down the spammer, and blacklist by domain instead of IP. I'm not quite sure what that means: how does MTX tie spam to a domain? Regardless, your proposal and MTAmark clearly have a lot in common, to me it seems to make a lot of sense to work with the two guys who wrote that RFC. Purpose - leverage their work, perhaps merge your two proposals, and most importantly: find out why MTAmark never really took off. /Per Jessen, Zürich
Re: MTAmark (was: MTX plugin functionally complete?)
Per Jessen wrote: Jonas Eckerman wrote: (And of course, if this catches on, you'll have to provide RFC style documentation.) See Justins posting from two days back: http://tools.ietf.org/draft/draft-stumpf-dns-mtamark/ http://tools.ietf.org/draft/draft-stumpf-dns-mtamark/draft-stumpf-dns-mtamark-04.txt That proposal does not appear to have caught a lot of interest in 2004/2005, but perhaps it might now. I went to google mtamark, and came across a few discussions on mailing lists (e.g. at www.sage.org) as well as an article in iX (German IT magazine) in 2005. The proposal was certainly discussed quite a bit, but it's not very clear what then happened. I also saw a few links to personal pages at space.net, but they're long gone. /Per Jessen, Zürich
MTAMark Re: MTX plugin functionally complete?
On 02/14, --[ UxBoD ]-- wrote: http://tools.ietf.org/draft/draft-stumpf-dns-mtamark/ Personally I think it is a great idea and anything to help combat the spam is always a worthwhile effort. Is it possible to resurrect that proposal and worth with the original authors and perhaps combine the efforts ? To paraphrase Ayn Rand, stop asking Can I? and start asking Who is going to stop me? It's important. Implement it. Get people to use it. Figure out how the RFC process works and push it through. I have to say keep in mind that MTAMark does not tie the spam to a domain, and MTX does, which makes it easier to track down the spammer, and blacklist by domain instead of IP. -- When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries of life disappear and life stands explained. - Mark Twain http://www.ChaosReigns.com
