Re: delineating DRIP

Alan DeKok wrote:
> 
> Raymond S Brand <[email protected]> wrote:
> > We are here to do something about the SPAM problem. The proposals under
> > consideration attempt to do this by making MAIL FROM parameter or HELO
> > parameter forging more difficult. The amount of collateral damage caused
> > by the implementation of a proposal does need to be considered.
> 
>   I strongly disagree.  At the minimum, we need to show in the
> document that we are aware of the potential collateral damage.  I also
> believe that we need to show that it's "worth it" to implement the
> proposal.

To show that it's "worth it", you're going to need to provide more information
than that "we are aware of the potential collateral damage". The type and
amount WILL be very important to the implementors.


Raymond S Brand