On Friday, March 10, 2006 at 9:08 AM Dave Crocker wrote: > I am warming to the model you describe. > > 1. It is an extremely well-established model. > > 2. It pertains to salient responsibilities in an information > transfer sequence. > > (Given that multiple operators can be in a sequence, I'd > suggest 'distributor' > rather than 'bookstore'.) > > It scares me quite a bit to have my email operator be vested > with apparent responsibility for the content of my email, > but, alas, I guess that really is what the anti-abuse work is about. > > What do other folks think?
The author=>publisher=>bookstore/distributor analogy resonates quite strongly with me (I have a quibble with "distributor" which I'll discuss in a moment). It is indeed a scary thought to vest responsibility of a message content with the email operator, but, as Dave observed, this is the point we seem to have reached in current messaging abuse control strategy. I *do* want the "publisher" of an email message to bear more responsbility for that message than a receiving MTA. This seems to be consistent with the principles of Carl Hutzler's Spamops I-D, and also in alignment with the direction MAAWG participants seem to be headed: control spam at the source rather than at the receiving end. While I understand Dave's point about "distributor", I fear that using this terminology might be confusing. Still using the author/publisher/bookstore analogy, "distributors" might be intermediaries between publishers and bookstores, and not the parties responsible for getting books in the hands of readers. Moreover, the term might also be thought to refer to parties that are responsible for transmitting a message, thus confusing "distributors" with "publishers". But I do like the distinctions between the-entity-responsible-for-creating-the-content-of-a-message, the-entity-responsible-for-emanating-a-message[1], and the-entity-responsible-for-getting-a-message-to-a-recipient. Differing roles, differing responsibilities. I just haven't decided yet which terms I like best for each of these roles. Regards, Nick [1] To be clear, when I speak of "emanating" a message, I am *not* referring to a situation such as when a secretary types a message for the boss and then presses the "send" button. -- Nick Nicholas Knowledge Engineer Habeas Inc. 650-694-3320 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
