> Verizon is not blocking outgoing port 25 to protect you or to control > you, they're blocking outgoing port 25 because of the abuse it exposes > them to. It obviously has no direct benefit to the end user, but it > does remove a common source of spam. This should lead to a net > reduction in spam.
Right. Cutting off my nose in spite of their face. er... I don't disagree with you that there isn't an inherent right to provide whatever service you feel like. However, the reality is, there really is little choice in Internet service for a reasonable cost. > I've run lots of mail servers, web servers, and all sorts of other fun > servers. I don't run them on my consumer internet service. Why not? Why shouldn't you be able to? > I also > don't think Verizon has an obligation to enable you to do that. This > is not Verizon attacking your freedom or privacy, this is Verizon > protecting their profits. They will sell you a business grade service > that lets you run all this stuff, have a static IP, QoS, whatever else > you want. Suppose I want to get consumer TV service from Verizon or Comcast as well as Business Internet. Have you looked at what that costs? It's absurd. You have to lease two separate lines. Yeah, sure, it's just two providers we're talking about, but that's almost the only game in town. It's not some feature that is a luxury for me, it's something I've used for years and now it's being taken away one ISP at a time. Having every user being able to share information is what makes the Internet the Internet, IMHO. Give me real competition in the market for consumer Internet service, and I'll shut up. Actually, I'll shut up now, for everyone else's benefit, since I doubt I'll convince you. > I'm not saying we shouldn't fix the system, I'm just saying it's a lot > more work than you might realize. There is no crazy spam filter > conspiracy. It's a massive problem that people and companies have > spent a decade and millions of dollars to try and fix. Oh, I realize it's a lot of work to fix SMTP and get it adopted. But if you look at the crazy amount of effort people are putting into: restricting users' ability to communicate running realtime blacklists gobs of machine learning (bayesian filters, et al) maintaining PKI for DKIM and the like pushing new DNS standards like SPF etc... It sure seems like it would be a better long term solution to deploy a protocol that puts much of this work on the sender. tim _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
