why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition

Lamar Owen lowen at pari.edu
Wed Mar 26 18:45:10 UTC 2014


On 03/26/2014 01:42 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> And I also remember thinking at the time that you missed one very
>> important angle, and that is that the typical ISP has the technical
>> capability to bill based on volume of traffic already, and could easily
>> bill per-byte for any traffic with 'e-mail properties' like being on
>> certain ports or having certain characteristics.  Yeah, I'm well aware
>> of the technical issues with that; I never said it was a good idea, but
>> what is the alternative?
> Where do you expect them to send the bill?

The entity with whom they already have a business relationship. 
Basically, if I'm an ISP I would bill each of my customers, with whom I 
already have a business relationship, for e-mail traffic.  Do this as 
close to the edge as possible.

And yes, I know, it will happen just about as soon as all edge networks 
start applying BCP38.  I'm well aware of the limitations and challenges, 
but I'm also well aware of how ungainly and broken current anti-spam 
measures are.

>   One of the things I
> pointed out in that white paper is that as soon as you have real money
> involved, you're going to have a whole new set of frauds and scams that
> are likely to be worse than the ones you thought you were solving.
Yes, and this is the most challenging aspect.

Again, I'm not saying e-postage is a good idea (because I don't think it 
is), but the fact of the matter is, like any other crime, as long as 
e-mail unsolicited commercial e-mail is profitable it will be done.

So, what other ways are there to make unsolicited commercial e-mail 
unprofitable?




More information about the NANOG mailing list