Subject: [Rucus] Can I get 10 minutes on the agenda for the RUCUS BoF?

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 09:26:06 -0800

Greetings. Wearing my Domain Assurance Council hat, I would like to 
do a very brief presentation about DAC's two independent submission 
drafts that directly relate to RUCUS. The first, 
draft-hoffman-dac-vbr-03.txt, is a way for reputation providers to 
whitelist particular types of content from a domain. It is meant for 
email, but could easily be extended to SIP if there is interest. The 
second, draft-hoffman-dac-domainrepdata-01.txt, is a more generic way 
for a reputation provider to send reputation that can be used by a 
recipient to determine whether or not to accept { mail | calls }.

You don't currently have much in the agenda on whitelisting, and 
these are getting a fair amount of interest in the email reputation 
market.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Domain Assurance Council
_______________________________________________
Rucus mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:38:20 +0200

Hi Paul,

thank you for pointing us to your documents. Your work indeed seems to 
be relevant and similar ideas have been discussed in the context of SIP.

There is only one problem: Based on the history of the work we said that 
we would not give presentation on individual solution attempts. We are 
trying to focus on architectural issues instead.
This was a pre-requisity to get the BOF accepted.

If we accept your request then other folks will rightfully argue that 
they should also be allowed to give their presentation.

Ciao
Hannes

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:48:05 -0800

At 8:38 PM +0200 3/5/08, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>There is only one problem: Based on the history of the work we said 
>that we would not give presentation on individual solution attempts. 
>We are trying to focus on architectural issues instead.

Sorry, I wasn't clear then: we are not proposing that VBR or our 
reputation format be considered as actual solutions. They are 
concrete examples of approaches to whitelisting, which I think will 
help the discussion. I can recast the request as discussing 
whitelisting formats in the email world, of which these two are 
examples.

>If we accept your request then other folks will rightfully argue 
>that they should also be allowed to give their presentation.

The term in English is "floodgates". :-) Of course.

--Paul Hoffman, Director

---

From: "Dan Wing" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:21:11 -0800

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> On Behalf Of Paul Hoffman
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:26 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Rucus] Can I get 10 minutes on the agenda for the RUCUS BoF?
> 
> email, but could easily be extended to SIP if there is interest.

That draft seems it could be useful for SIP's E.164 identity problem, too.

-d

> The

---

From: Otmar Lendl <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:48:18 +0100

> these are getting a fair amount of interest in the email reputation 

The dac drafts sound like a KISS solution to the referral/whitelist
problem. As such, they could be very valuable to any whitelist based
anti-spit architecture. Certainly worth considering.

I won't be in Philly, but I encourage this group to get as much input
and experience from the email side of the spam-battle as possible.

I have this nagging feeling that if the anti-spam veterans look at some
of the proposals here, they'd give polite harumphs and explain to
us that "yes, we thought of that 5 years ago, and it doesn't work
because of X, Y and Z".

As a consequence, what about adding another mandatory section to
rucus I-D (like Security and IANA Considerations) called "Applicability
to SPAM Considerations"? In that section, the author must explain either
why this approach could also help with SPAM, or why in his view the
analogy to email does not apply.

/ol
-- 
-=-  Otmar Lendl  --  [email-masked]  -=-
_______________________________________________
Rucus mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus