Re: Problems with SPF, solutions, and a timeline.

On 28 Feb 2004, John Levine wrote:

> > So any argument against LMAP, that it doesn't prevent spam is
> >*completely* missing the intent of the proposal, which is stated in
> >plain English in the document.
> 
> Great, we agree, LMAP is of no use to deter spam.  Since this is the
> anti-spam research group, rather than some other research group, we've
> also agreed that LMAP is of no further interest here.
As I have already wrote privately to John, and have written long ago on asrg, 
LMAP and similar proposals will not stop or seriously effect spam except 
possibly for short time - spammers will either use throw-away domains 
which are LMAP complaint or they will forge numerous other domains that 
have no LMAP records. 

ASRG during this year has fucused way too much on this particular issue in 
expense of other things which have not been very productive for this group
and have led to me and others not participating except occasional glances.

However having noted that LMAP will not stop spam, we still have to consider
that it is usefull to prevent abuse of some well known domains and it that 
may have secondary effect on removing some totally illegal phishing spams 
and any spammer revenue that may come from that source. That in itself 
makes it a possible secondary issue of ASRG.

> Unless someone has something to propose that does have some relationship
> to spam, I'll shut down this mailing list shortly.
I believe shutting down this mail list is premature considering that it 
has been around for very short time. However the people arguing about 
LMAP proposals have unfortunetly not let any other ideas be expressed
(if they exist) and I would support moving LMAP discussions into its own 
totally separate mail list and group within ASRG

---
William Leibzon
[email protected]