FWIW, I believe Keith is probably right. Blacklisting has been a major
impediment to my own email usage. I don't know about any *particular*
blacklisting service because when your ISP gets blacklisted by mistake
and you're simply collateral damage, it's very hard for you to get an
explanation
>I'd be interested in answers people get from other consulate/embassy
>staff both from locations other than Boston and with different
>phrasings of the question.
Well, I finally was able to talk to someone at the Washington, DC, embassy.
Their answer? "We're not sure, but you might need one".
I
> From: Nathaniel Borenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> FWIW, I believe Keith is probably right. Blacklisting has been a major
> impediment to my own email usage. I don't know about any *particular*
> blacklisting service because when your ISP gets blacklisted by mistake
> and you're simply collat
Hi -
> From: "Vernon Schryver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 9:49 AM
> Subject: Re: SMTP Minimum Retry Period - Proposal To Modify Mx
...
> Several times? As far as I know, most people I know have never been
> collateral or other kinds of blacklist
Interesting reading: some have been asking what the cost of moving from a
peer-to-peer to a service/consumer model are, in terms of applications
deployed and the ability to build more robust business models. Many ISPs
are thinking in terms of VoIP as a next generation business, the one after
"s
While one aging application does not constitute 'the Internet', this should
be taken as an early indicator of things that are happing, with more to
come.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/speakfree/eol/
Like it or not, the IETF must stop wasting time and effort building new
structures on a crumbling framew
> Fred Baker wrote:
> Many ISPs are thinking in terms of VoIP as a next generation
> business, the one after "selling bandwidth". But there are
> issues with that as well...
You must be talking about ISPs that are not in bed with a phone company;
at this point in time I don't see how they can comp
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Fred Baker wrote:
> Interesting reading: some have been asking what the cost of moving from a
> peer-to-peer to a service/consumer model are, in terms of applications
> deployed and the ability to build more robust business models. Many ISPs
> are thinking in terms of VoIP as
On Monday, January 12, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Vernon Schryver wrote:
Several times? As far as I know, most people I know have never been
collateral or other kinds of blacklist damage. Do you use what might
be called marginal ISPs? Some large outfits such as UUNet have long
refused to care enough a
At 02:02 PM 1/12/2004, Tony Hain wrote...
>While one aging application does not constitute 'the Internet', this should
>be taken as an early indicator of things that are happing, with more to
>come.
The true threat is administrative, not technical. It won't do any good to have an IPv6
address sp
While one aging application does not constitute 'the Internet', this should
be taken as an early indicator of things that are happing, with more to
come.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/speakfree/eol/
Like it or not, the IETF must stop wasting time and effort building new
structures on a crumbling framewor
> Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
> Pardon me if I'm missing something obvious here, but
> couldn't one just use either XMPP or Simple for presence,
> associate your "server name" with a Jabber/Simple ID, and
> automatically have your "server" findable via these
> general presence protocols?
One not
Tony Hain wrote:
While one aging application does not constitute 'the Internet', this should
be taken as an early indicator of things that are happing, with more to
come.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/speakfree/eol/
Like it or not, the IETF must stop wasting time and effort building new
structures on
Ken,
As it happens, I attended a dinner Saturday that was addressed
by Ambassador Han, the Korean Ambassador to the U.S.
Taking up the Korean visa issue today, I spoke with an official
in the Washington DC visa section.
I believe I can state the visa regulation as it applies to U.S.
citizens.
> - Individuals traveling to Korean to attend the IETF meeting
>do not need a visa, as they are traveling to attend a
>non-profit conference. They can stay in Korea up to 30
>day for such purpose and for tourism.
Ah, okay, this makes sense now, because there was a slight language
iss
> From: Nathaniel Borenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> I also have to say that I fear your approach would help the larger ISPs
> use spam as an excuse to kill off smaller ISP's...
How so? Exactly what is my approach? Please note what I've said too
many times:
- I don't currently use a pu
On 12-jan-04, at 20:55, Gordon Cook wrote:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimatur/ is the really
spooky essay. Excerpted in my December issue.
Read the Digital Imprimatur if you haven't already.
I find it a tad on the wordy side... (27731 words, to be precise, more
than an hour
On 12-jan-04, at 21:13, Paul Robinson wrote:
The modern Internet is run by marketing, not technical, requirements.
IPv6 will not take off any time soon because neither the end-user nor
the service provider sees the need. The moment AOL, Wanadoo, Tiscali,
World Online et al shout out "we *need*
[my final message to the list on this thread]
On Monday, January 12, 2004, at 03:51 PM, Vernon Schryver wrote:
I also have to say that I fear your approach would help the larger
ISPs
use spam as an excuse to kill off smaller ISP's...
How so? Exactly what is my approach?
I'm sorry, you're right
You seem to have missed the point. Not only are we loosing existing
applications, there are untold new things that are not making it to market.
These new applications are unable to generate the critical mass they need to
make any marketing noise because the NAT rich environment is too difficult
for
> Good point. That's why I favor giving users access to their spam pool
> when they suspect problems, and using challenge/response in certain
> (carefully defined) situations.
> A good filtering mechanism is not nearly as black and white as a blacklist.
so, you're conflating two things here:
> Tony Hain wrote:
> You won't get the development community to pay attention
> to the simplicity afforded by IPv6 until the IETF stops
> wasting time trying to extend a dead protocol.
If one in {IPv4,IPv6} could be qualified as dead, it's IPv6. If it was
not for IPv4, the majority of this list wo
> From: Bill Sommerfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> One problem with dropping suspected spam into a spam cesspool as
> opposed to rejecting it outright in the SMTP session is that many
> people (myself included) have neither the time nor the inclination to
> wade through our spam cesspools on a re
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:29:02 -0800
Fred Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Interesting reading: some have been asking what the cost of
> moving from a peer-to-peer to a service/consumer model are, in
> terms of applications deployed and the ability to build more
> robust business models. Many ISPs
> - Individuals traveling to Korean to attend the IETF meeting
> do not need a visa, as they are traveling to attend a
> non-profit conference. They can stay in Korea up to 30
> day for such purpose and for tourism.
>
> - If you travel to Korea for business purposes, such as
>
At 06:50 PM 1/12/2004, Vernon Schryver wrote...
>Instead of paying the extra cost to hire an ISP that cares
>enough to not have spamming customers, people complain about the evils
>of blacklists.
Feh. Once again with an argument based on incorrect assumptions.
I don't spam. I would preferential
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Mike S wrote:
> At 06:50 PM 1/12/2004, Vernon Schryver wrote...
> >Instead of paying the extra cost to hire an ISP that cares
> >enough to not have spamming customers, people complain about the evils
> >of blacklists.
>
> Feh. Once again with an argument based on incorrect ass
At 09:58 PM 1/12/2004, Dean Anderson wrote...
>On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Mike S wrote:
>1) privacy - routing via my ISP's outbound SMTP gives them
>> the right to intercept and read my email, according the ECPA;
>
>Err, Just the opposite is more freqently the case.The ECPA specifically prohibits the
>I
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike S)
> ...
> >Instead of paying the extra cost to hire an ISP that cares
> >enough to not have spamming customers, people complain about the evils
> >of blacklists.
> ...
> I can't do so because my IP address is on a blacklist. I have
> cable modem, but the world th
% > - Individuals traveling to Korean to attend the IETF meeting
% > do not need a visa, as they are traveling to attend a
% > non-profit conference. They can stay in Korea up to 30
% > day for such purpose and for tourism.
% >
% > - If you travel to Korea for business purposes, s
On 12 Jan 2004, at 15:13, Paul Robinson wrote:
IPv6 will not take off any time soon because neither the end-user nor
the service provider sees the need. The moment AOL, Wanadoo, Tiscali,
World Online et al shout out "we *need* IPv6" it will happen. Quickly.
Interestingly, whenever we deploy an F
31 matches
Mail list logo
