From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM Tue May 1 14:28:20 2001 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com ([192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA06804 for ; Tue, 1 May 2001 14:28:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 2000/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with ESMTP id KAA21485; Tue, 1 May 2001 10:59:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 5585 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Tue, 1 May 2001 10:59:33 -0700 Received: from clio.sc.intel.com (scfdns01.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.25]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 2000/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with ESMTP id KAA21481 for ; Tue, 1 May 2001 10:59:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ludwig.sc.intel.com (ludwig.sc.intel.com [143.183.53.32]) by clio.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.36 2001/04/18 16:16:02 root Exp $) with SMTP id RAA13715; Tue, 1 May 2001 17:57:21 GMT Received: by Ludwig.sc.intel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17205; Tue, 1 May 01 10:55:45 PDT Message-ID: <10105011755.AA17205@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 10:55:45 PDT Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: Sally Hambridge Subject: Re: We've got lift-off Comments: To: tedgavin@newsguy.com To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM > > Ted - check with April on the process for revisions - and if you want to add the confirmed opt-in stuff I think it would make the doc better, but I think it would have to go through the entire approval loop again As for spamcon, I can't think of anything special.... Sally > Ted said: >Speaking of RFC-3098, how does everyone feel about making a quick >amendment and resubmitting? We've gotten some good feedback and >suggestions that would indicate that perhaps something is missing. In >the discussion, we neglected to include a mail-loop approval, which >essentially prevents the activity of an opt-in request until the >requestor actually does something (click on a link, reply to the >message, etc...). This shifts the responsibility from the user (having >to deal with unauthorized subscriptions) to the list owners (having to >verify each address prior to inclusion). It's a MAPS-endorsed >protection, and I think it warrants inclusion in some text from the >IETF. > >I'd be happy to make the changes and present it to the group and up >the chain for resubmission, but I'd like to see what Sally, April and >the group have to say about it. > >On another note, I've been asked to speak at SPAMCON regarding this >subject and Responsible Use, from the business perspective as well as >the policy perspective. Anyone have any points they'd like to see >included? > >Ted > > From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM Fri May 4 10:16:29 2001 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com ([192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA12966 for ; Fri, 4 May 2001 10:16:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 2000/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with ESMTP id GAA11883; Fri, 4 May 2001 06:49:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 5487 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Fri, 4 May 2001 06:49:38 -0700 Received: from torque.pothole.com ([38.138.52.132]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 2000/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with ESMTP id GAA11879 for ; Fri, 4 May 2001 06:49:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost by torque.pothole.com (8.9.3/1.1.29.3/11Jan01-1206AM) id JAA0000085156; Fri, 4 May 2001 09:45:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Mts: smtp Message-ID: <200105041345.JAA0000085156@torque.pothole.com> Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 09:45:50 -0400 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN From: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" Subject: Re: We've got lift-off To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 01 May 2001 10:55:45 PDT." <10105011755.AA17205@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> I'd like to agree that a pretty simple quick amendment is called for. I'm a bit embarassed that I looked too much at the details rather than the overall picture when I did my final review. While it is true that such a revision would need to go through the "entire approval loop" again, if the revised document is based on the published RFC with changes confined to one or two section, I don't think it would have much trouble... Thanks, Donald From: Sally Hambridge Message-ID: <10105011755.AA17205@Ludwig.sc.intel.com> Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 10:55:45 PDT Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN Comments: To: tedgavin@newsguy.com To: IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM >> >> >Ted - check with April on the process for revisions - and if >you want to add the confirmed opt-in stuff I think it would >make the doc better, but I think it would have to go through >the entire approval loop again > >As for spamcon, I can't think of anything special.... > >Sally >> >Ted said: >>Speaking of RFC-3098, how does everyone feel about making a quick >>amendment and resubmitting? We've gotten some good feedback and >>suggestions that would indicate that perhaps something is missing. In >>the discussion, we neglected to include a mail-loop approval, which >>essentially prevents the activity of an opt-in request until the >>requestor actually does something (click on a link, reply to the >>message, etc...). This shifts the responsibility from the user (having >>to deal with unauthorized subscriptions) to the list owners (having to >>verify each address prior to inclusion). It's a MAPS-endorsed >>protection, and I think it warrants inclusion in some text from the >>IETF. >> >>I'd be happy to make the changes and present it to the group and up >>the chain for resubmission, but I'd like to see what Sally, April and >>the group have to say about it. >> >>On another note, I've been asked to speak at SPAMCON regarding this >>subject and Responsible Use, from the business perspective as well as >>the policy perspective. Anyone have any points they'd like to see >>included? >> >>Ted >> >> From IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM Wed May 30 13:24:51 2001 Received: from mailbag.cps.intel.com ([192.102.199.72]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA18763 for ; Wed, 30 May 2001 13:24:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailbag.intel.com (mailbag.cps.intel.com [192.102.199.72]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 2000/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with ESMTP id KAA24405; Wed, 30 May 2001 10:06:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MAILBAG.INTEL.COM by MAILBAG.INTEL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 6361 for IETF-RUN@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM; Wed, 30 May 2001 10:06:36 -0700 Received: from chinacat.unicom.com (chinacat.unicom.com [192.108.105.34]) by mailbag.cps.intel.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/d: relay.m4,v 1.6 2000/11/24 22:10:56 iwep Exp iwep $) with ESMTP id KAA24398 for ; Wed, 30 May 2001 10:06:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from chip@localhost) by chinacat.unicom.com (8.11.0/8.10.1) id f4UH1gj26273; Wed, 30 May 2001 12:01:42 -0500 Message-ID: <200105301701.f4UH1gj26273@chinacat.unicom.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 12:01:42 -0500 Reply-To: IETF-RUN Sender: IETF-RUN Comments: RFC822 error: Incorrect or incomplete address field found and ignored. From: Chip Rosenthal Subject: call for participation - Abuse-Practices mailing list To: IETF-RUN@mailbag.cps.INTEL.COM (NOTE: This announcement is being sent to: 1) some spam-oriented mailing lists in which I participate, 2) Spamcon attendees who requested notification, and 3) some personal friends who I thought might be interested. Spamcon attendees -- you must subscribe to participate. I do NOT intend to send further mailings to the addresses I collected.) A new mailing list called Abuse-Practices is being formed. The purpose of this list is to develop and document best practices for Internet abuse handling and Internet use policies. If you have any interest or experience in spam or other Internet abuse handling, I hope you will join this list. I proposed an Abuse-Practices list at the 2001 Spamcon conference . Support was phenomenal. About 60% of the attendees signed a list expressing interest in participating. I believe there is a need for this document, and we could do some valuable work. For more information, please visit the list web page at: http://www.unicom.com/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/abuse-practices You can subscribe on this web page. Or, send email to with the word "subscribe" in the subject.