True statement, but that means the senders of the other 5% are now left in the dark as to what happened to their mail. Is there a proposed solution to that?
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Levine Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 5:51 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: NDNs considered harmful >> I note, again fwiw, that I've been trying to get various advocates >> for a ban (or near-ban) on NDNs to write that separate document and >> propose a specific model at regular intervals since well before >> 2821 was completed. >I'm new to that particular topic. Can you explain its motivation or >point me to a discussion thread that lays it out so I can get some >context? Nothing surprising -- on today's Internet where 95% of mail is spam and essentially all the spam has forged return addresses, no matter how careful you are, most of your NDNs will be blowback to people who didn't send the mail. R's, John
