Spam Control Considered Harmful
phil at agis.net
Thu Oct 30 01:42:17 UTC 1997
At 04:00 PM 10/29/97 -0800, Derek Andree wrote:
>Phil Lawlor wrote:
>> Exactly. I guess the question is, should we build more sender verification
>> into sendmail, on both the sending and receiving side?
> It would seem like a nice feature for Sendmail, but do you think it is
>realistic to assume that everyone would upgrade? I know of many hosts which
>use "outdated" versions of Sendmail. Then you would be faced with the
>question of whether to only allow connections from the latest version of
>sendmail (with the sender verification), which would limit it's usefulness.
Right. Companies that don't have a need to upgrade, won't go through the
expense. In many areas, caller ID is an optional feature that costs more
to have. I found it very useful earlier this year when someone posted my
home phone number on the Internet. If spam is really a big problem for an
organization, than they will go through the pain to solve it.
Voice - 313-730-1130
Fax - 313-563-6119
More information about the NANOG