On 11/19/09 1:20 PM, Kevin Smith wrote: > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'd also like some feedback on my proposal for server reputations. A >> server is not boolean "good" or "bad", but probably some shade of grey. >> I think that a new server on the network would start with a score of >> zero. Its score would go up for: > ... >> Its score would go down (negative) for: > ... >> My main concern here is that we have objective criteria for scoring >> servers, not arbitrary decisions by DNSBL operators. > > The interesting thing about scores is that you can do sensible things > with them, instead of dead blocking. > > For example: > A (very!) high scoring server may be blocked entirely.
I think that would be a very low scoring server, as in negative (at least if we say zero = new server and we increment for good behavior and decrement for bad behavior). > A low scoring server, but still notably scored, may be blocked from > sending messages to people not in their roster, or from joining rooms > where they're not members, etc. > Score can be used for rate limiting, etc. Agreed. Lots of possibilities. :) > The interesting thing about the former is that it's possible for two > users who want to talk to each other to still do so, or to let users > into chatrooms. This may be particularly interesting where the server > is benevolent, but abused. I'm sure we have a lot of those. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
