On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 17:40:55 PDT, Matt Ghali said:
So you see, the reputation has nothing to do with your mom, and everything to do with the controlling entity, her ISP. Which makes the whole address-based sender reputation scheme almost workable, if you ignore the scaling issues.
That's suspiciously close to "Ralph Nader or Ross Perot could have been elected President, if you ignore the scaling issues". :) Yes. There's a reason I did not include a ringing endorsement of sender reputation schemes as the FUSSP; it has colossal inherent scaling issues; however I believe the 90/10 rule will make it at least somewhat effective. Other than that, what Matt said is correct - the problem is that legitimate mail can come from literally millions of places whose reputation we have no clue on.... Yes. Sender reputation on an per-ip level is a lot of state. However; I believe that sender reputation on a swip level may be attainable, and provide positive value. matto PS: Even though it's painfully obvious, I speak only for myself and no entity currently/previously employing me- Especially those kooks at UCB. --matt@snark.net------------------------------------------<darwin>< The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke