Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

I don't think there's anything wrong with sounding out some ideas if they arose from careful thought and sufficient experience and subject knowledge. Just saying call us when you've got a unicorn in hand is a brush-off. But one has to find the right venue for such brainstorming which I think

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 11:42 AM wrote: > But when someone says to me spam isn't much of a problem because it's > mostly blocked by local filtering (i.e., they don't see much spam in > their inbox), usually in an attempt to shut down any discussion > entirely, I know I'm hearing from someone who

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

I'm sure some will react to this viscerally but I'd argue that a large chunk of the spam issue is an operational issue due to factors like: 1. Volume, bandwidth 2. Spammers' address block hijacking and other misuse of resources 3. Revenge (typically DDoS) attacks by spammers 4. General

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 02/22/2019 09:28 AM, John Curran wrote: If you (or your email service provider) deploy an optional solution (e.g. DMARC p=reject) that prevents you from receiving email from mailing lists sending in conformance with existing standards, then that’s your choice. From the perspective of

RE: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Friday, 22 February, 2019 09:36, Miles Fidelman : > But re. "one doesn't communicate with folks .. etc." --- when one has > ongoing communication with a large group of people (e.g., an email > list) --- and a large provider shuts a door, the impact is on more than > just the customers of

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/22/19 11:28 AM, John Curran wrote: On 22 Feb 2019, at 9:58 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: On 2/22/19 10:07 AM, John Curran wrote: On 22 Feb 2019, at 7:08 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: On 2/22/19 12:03 AM, John Curran wrote: Either way, until such time your solution is deployed widely enough

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 22 Feb 2019, at 9:58 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > > On 2/22/19 10:07 AM, John Curran wrote: > >> On 22 Feb 2019, at 7:08 AM, Miles Fidelman >> wrote: >>> On 2/22/19 12:03 AM, John Curran wrote: >>> Either way, until such time your solution is deployed widely enough to

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/22/19 10:07 AM, John Curran wrote: On 22 Feb 2019, at 7:08 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: On 2/22/19 12:03 AM, John Curran wrote: Either way, until such time your solution is deployed widely enough to significantly impact network operations, it’s unlikely to be a particularly relevant

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 22 Feb 2019, at 7:08 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > > On 2/22/19 12:03 AM, John Curran wrote: > >> Either way, until such time your solution is deployed widely enough to >> significantly impact network operations, it’s unlikely to be a particularly >> relevant topic for discussion here. >> >

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 19:01:40 -0700, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" may have written: > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 1:24 PM Matthew Black > wrote: > > Have you ever created a sendmail.cf without using M4? > > I still believe that sendmail is Alien technology. How else can one > explain

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/22/19 12:03 AM, John Curran wrote: Either way, until such time your solution is deployed widely enough to significantly impact network operations, it’s unlikely to be a particularly relevant topic for discussion here. Notable exception:  DMARC.  Broke email lists everywhere - including

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]...sendmail.cf

Boston Univ Computing Center Director: Barry, is it true that all our BITNET email to/from the academic mainframe goes to our TCP/IP sites (mostly computer science) via a gateway at the University Wisconsin? Me: Yes that is correct, I set that up, they're ok with that. BUCCD: So every email is

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 17 Feb 2019, at 8:03 PM, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: > ... > White Paper - https://www.dombox.org/dombox.pdf > Viruthagiri - It does not appear that you require anything from this community, as it appears from reading your white paper that your

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]...sendmail.cf

On 20 Feb 2019, at 9:16 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote: > On February 20, 2019 at 15:29 br...@2mbit.com (Brielle Bruns) wrote: >> On 2/20/2019 1:22 PM, Matthew Black wrote: >>> Have you ever created a sendmail.cf without using M4? > > I've certainly maintained them, one usually started with whatever

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]...sendmail.cf

On February 21, 2019 at 18:23 feld...@twincreeks.net (Steve Feldman) wrote: > On Feb 20, 2019, at 7:16 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote: > > > > (Berknet was largly written by Eric Schmidt, as in the former Google CEO) > > I'm pretty sure that was Eric Allman, though I had the privilege of

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

> On Feb 21, 2019, at 20:21, Brett Watson wrote: > >> On Feb 20, 2019, at 19:01, Forrest Christian (List Account) >> wrote: >> >> I still believe that sendmail is Alien technology. How else can one >> explain sendmail.cf? > > Eric Altman and scotch, lots of scotch (as I remember it from

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Feb 20, 2019, at 19:01, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: > > I still believe that sendmail is Alien technology. How else can one > explain sendmail.cf? Eric Altman and scotch, lots of scotch (as I remember it from Usenix). -b

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]...sendmail.cf

On Feb 20, 2019, at 7:16 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote: > > (Berknet was largly written by Eric Schmidt, as in the former Google CEO) I'm pretty sure that was Eric Allman, though I had the privilege of being a lowly Masters student at Berkeley while both Erics, along with Bill Joy and a host of

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/20/19 8:44 PM, William Herrin wrote: I only wish postfix had as good diagnostic tools for analyzing address transform and delivery selection. ~chuckle~ It's been a while since I've seen someone say they wished Postfix had something that Sendmail has. I agree that Sendmail's rule test

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 12:23 PM Matthew Black wrote: > Have you ever created a sendmail.cf without using M4? I started using sendmail before sendmail started using M4. I'm still using the hand-hacked sendmail.cf I built up over time. I had to muck with the sendmail package on my Linux distro

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]...sendmail.cf

On February 20, 2019 at 15:29 br...@2mbit.com (Brielle Bruns) wrote: > On 2/20/2019 1:22 PM, Matthew Black wrote: > > Have you ever created a sendmail.cf without using M4? I've certainly maintained them, one usually started with whatever came with the source distr or maybe you'd get someone

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 1:24 PM Matthew Black wrote: > Have you ever created a sendmail.cf without using M4? I still believe that sendmail is Alien technology. How else can one explain sendmail.cf?And although I can't say for sure that I created a sendmail.cf from scratch without using the

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Been there, done that (I wrote my own driver for the bisync card, so I didn’t have the latter problem, just had to tame a barely documented Motorola chip “helping” with the already weird DLE handling). I’d still prefer doing that again over today’s spam problem. (There actually is a teachable

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 20:22:51 +, Matthew Black said: > Have you ever created a sendmail.cf without using M4? Sendmail 5.6mumble or so, for a machine that was on UUCP, Arpa/Milnet, and Bitnet and gatewayed between them. Bitnet was particularly ugly because (a) EBCDIC and (b) no way to

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

21, 2019 4:01 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request] On 2/20/2019 1:22 PM, Matthew Black wrote: > Have you ever created a sendmail.cf without using M4? Well, that brought back memories I did not want to revisit. You are going to make me want to take

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/20/2019 1:22 PM, Matthew Black wrote: Have you ever created a sendmail.cf without using M4? Well, that brought back memories I did not want to revisit. You are going to make me want to take up drinking. -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org/

RE: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Just to put my unwelcome, OT 2 cents in... Spammers, individual spamming operations, send on the order of one billion emails per day, per each. Their business model depends on doing that. That's why we all see the same sort of spams over and over to the point one can make a joke about them

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/20/2019 12:22 PM, Matthew Black wrote: SIGH. I am far more inclined to listen to John Levine or Suresh Ramasubramanian, both who have been around for decades and have earned their chops with DMARC and Sendmail. Both with a proven track record, rather than someone lacking credentials.

RE: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

reated a sendmail.cf without using M4? [This message represents views of the author and not any employer (present or former).] From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2019 6:04 PM To: nanog list Subject: A Zero Spam Mail

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/19/19 12:37 AM, Scott Weeks wrote: --- beec...@beecher.cc wrote: From: Tom Beecher Every single person on this list has either sent an email they later regret[...] -- Not me. No way. Never. ;) scott Bet you're about to regret this one.

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/18/19 9:37 PM, Scott Weeks wrote: > Not me. No way. Never. ;) Then why is Mr. Murphy tapping you on the shoulder? Didn't your Mom and Dad ever tell you to never say "never"?

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

--- beec...@beecher.cc wrote: From: Tom Beecher Every single person on this list has either sent an email they later regret[...] -- Not me. No way. Never. ;) scott

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nRlbTO3RH1s/Uo-X_PX6WBI/JLU/mirPbTYFa6U/s1600/unnamed.jpg -- J. Hellenthal The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume. > On Feb 18, 2019, at 16:57, Tom Beecher wrote: > > Every single

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Every single person on this list has either sent an email they later regret , or will do so eventually. Full credit to you for acknowledging and owning this. Best of luck to you. On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 09:08 Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: > @Everyone > > I'm not gonna justify my

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 12:29:54 -0700, "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq." said: > Especially when they are well-respected members of both NANOG and the greater > email community. Seriously?? Attacking John and Suresh?? It's been a while since the time somebody was dorksplaining RIP to Tony Li. :)

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On February 18, 2019 at 12:29 amitch...@isipp.com (Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.) wrote: > > > > On Feb 17, 2019, at 7:14 PM, Ross Tajvar wrote: > > > > I'd be a lot more inclined to read your paper if you weren't so > > self-righteous about it. Rehashing all the times people disagreed with

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

> On Feb 17, 2019, at 7:14 PM, Ross Tajvar wrote: > > I'd be a lot more inclined to read your paper if you weren't so > self-righteous about it. Rehashing all the times people disagreed with > ("attacked") you is a poor way to encourage others to earnestly engage with > your ideas.

RE: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

> Ross Tajvar wrote : > Not to derail this highly relevant thread, and forgive my ignorance, but > what's the issue with IPv6 multihoming? In the original spec of IPv6, there were no PI addresses, only PA; one of the unfulfilled promises of IPv6 was that the IPv6 DFZ would remain very small.

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

This is great news... > On Feb 18, 2019, at 12:02 PM, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan > wrote: > > I'm leaving this mailing list too. Can a Nanog Op please ban this guy from joining again?

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

@Everyone I'm not gonna justify my behaviour. Yes my post was rude. I made a mistake. I was way over in my head. When I typed the original message I was obsessed with the man John Levine. He was responsible for the attacks on me in 4 mailing lists. DMARC, DKIM, IETF and this one (the old thread).

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 10:58 PM Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: > Literally everyone attacking me here. Could you tell me why? Because we disapprove of argumentum ad hominem and assume that if your reasoning leads with that fallacy right out of the gate it will contain the other errors as

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 2/17/2019 11:58 PM, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: Just gone through all your replies. Literally everyone attacking me here. Could you tell me why? Technical people like what you'd find on this list tend to want to get right to the point on things. If you want them to hear you out,

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 12:28:21 +0530, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan said: > Literally everyone attacking me here. Could you tell me why? Because I have > been rude to John Levine, right? No, it's because (a) every aspect we could understand from your writing has already been tried and failed, and

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 8:05 PM Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: > These guys always are the know-it-all assholes. They don't listen. They don't > want to listen. I would simply like to remind everyone that NANOG is a Mailing list that has some rules. They could be found here:

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Thanks James for the feedback. I created that medium post for non-technical audience. But yes your feedback is quite valid. I just removed plenty of content from the blog post. You don't need a throw-away email account in my system. If I had to create an entry for each domain I wanted to

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019, 9:56 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer > Sequoia Capital is one of the well known venture firm in the > > world. They have invested in over 250 companies since 1972, > > including Apple, Google, Oracle, PayPal, Stripe, YouTube, Instagram, > > Yahoo! and WhatsApp. > > Come on, most

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 18 February 2019 06:58:21 GMT, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: >Just gone through all your replies. > >Literally everyone attacking me here. Could you tell me why? Because I >have >been rude to John Levine, right? So you all think you have the right to >give me "mob justice". But as an

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019, 5:05 AM Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: > @Töma Gavrichenkov > > In theory, I can easily recall a few cases in my life when going >> through just 50 words was quite enough for a judgment. > > > How can you be so sure that you didn't fuck up none of the lives of these >

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 12:28:21PM +0530, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote a message of 111 lines which said: > Just gone through all your replies. And apparently you did not read them and did not take any lesson in it. > Literally everyone attacking me here. In the current thread, NOT ONE

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 18/Feb/19 08:58, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: > > It sucks when you sit on the "humiliation" chair when the mistake is > not yours. I'm a farmer's son from a third world country, yet trying > to contribute to this world in the way I can.  > > Asking for feedback is not a mistake. But I

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

You are so missing the point. This isn't about your interaction with John Levine. You came her asking for feedback (after an extensive and very unprofessional rant) and you got it. Just because you don't like the feedback doesn't mean people are "attacking" you. This is so irrelevant to NANOG.

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Just gone through all your replies. Literally everyone attacking me here. Could you tell me why? Because I have been rude to John Levine, right? So you all think you have the right to give me "mob justice". But as an innocent man I have to suffer all John Levine attacks because he is a most

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 07:33:32AM +0530, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote a message of 515 lines which said: > My name is Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan. I'm the guy who proposed SMTP > over TLS on Port 26 Besides all the excellent remarks that were made here (and I seriously urge you to read

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Agreed. I’ve never seen someone so excited to have reinvented TMDA from the 1990’s. Please, tell us more how the Internet will readdress itself to meet your fascinating solution. Can we go back to talking about network engineering now? Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 17, 2019, at 19:21,

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

> On Feb 17, 2019, at 19:26, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > I was thinking more of the guy who was convinced that each octet in an IPV4 > address could store 0 through 256. That's what the overflow flag is for, right?

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

I made it a few dozen pages into the white paper, it's 200+ pages long and TBH just rambles on about what spam bots are and other basic definitions. No one who doesn't know all that will even attempt to read your paper I don't think. THAT SAID, I got to the point where it required CAPTCHAs of

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 18/02/2019 04:03, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: If that is the case you should have a startup worth at least $10M with numerous VC banging down your door. If not, you need to ask yourself the question "why not?". -Hank Hello Everyone, My name is Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan. I'm

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:23 PM wrote: > > > [Today's discussion is about whether I solved the spam problem. Not > about how > > I'm gonna distribute the solution] > > You apparently don't understand that how the solution gets distributed is a > very important part of whether the solution will

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 22:16:50 -0500, Jon Lewis said: > Anyone else having flashbacks to Jim Fleming telling us about how IPv8 was > the final ultimate solution to IPv4 runout? I was thinking more of the guy who was convinced that each octet in an IPV4 address could store 0 through 256.

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 07:33:32 +0530, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan said: > My name is Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan. I'm the guy who proposed SMTP over > TLS on Port 26 Unfortunately, your attempt there didn't demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of the email ecology of the sort needed to *actually* solve

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Anyone else having flashbacks to Jim Fleming telling us about how IPv8 was the final ultimate solution to IPv4 runout? On Mon, 18 Feb 2019, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: ... and of all those, once you solve v6 multihoming (possibly with ipv9) do come back to nanog where I'm sure it will be

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Not to derail this highly relevant thread, and forgive my ignorance, but what's the issue with IPv6 multihoming? On Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 10:01 PM Suresh Ramasubramanian ... and of all those, once you solve v6 multihoming (possibly with ipv9) > do come back to nanog where I'm sure it will be

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: Hello Everyone, My name is Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan. I'm the guy who proposed SMTP over TLS on Port 26 last month. I'm also the guy who attacked (???) John Levine. Today I have something to show you.  Long story short I solved the

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

... and of all those, once you solve v6 multihoming (possibly with ipv9) do come back to nanog where I'm sure it will be operational. On 18/02/19, 8:23 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Michel Py" wrote: > Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote : > I solved the email spam problem. Oh, this

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

I can't get past all the blabbering to bother reviewing stuff. But why does this guy remind me of Shiva Ayyadurai - you know, the "inventor of email." Seriously - isn't the general rule to start with a demonstration, not a polemic?  (Shiva actually built an email system.  And people actually

RE: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

> Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote : > I solved the email spam problem. Oh, this is wonderful news. There are plenty of other problems that need your brilliance. In no specific order : - Global warming. - Nuclear proliferation. - Peace in the middle east. - World hunger. - IPv6 multihoming. We

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

There's this small percentage of cranks that are brilliant Doc Emmett Brown level inventors who come up with truly brilliant products and solutions. And then there's the much larger percentage of cranks that have a bad idea that they're prepared to defend to the last. Very well then .. On Mon,

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

This is truly awful and off topic for network engineering. Please stop and try to listen to the people who are offering you feedback. On other lists. Not here. Thanks! T On Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 21:05 Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan Hello Everyone, > > My name is Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan. I'm the

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

You literally lost my interest in reading your solution when I realized that 99.999% of this post is just you railing against people. People are right, if you can’t get my attention in 50 words, then either your solution isn’t a solution but a marketing ploy, or you need someone who

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

I'd be a lot more inclined to read your paper if you weren't so self-righteous about it. Rehashing all the times people disagreed with ("attacked") you is a poor way to encourage others to earnestly engage with your ideas. On Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 9:06 PM Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan Hello Everyone,

Re: A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

On 02/17/2019 06:03 PM, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: Hello Everyone, - John

A Zero Spam Mail System [Feedback Request]

Hello Everyone, My name is Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan. I'm the guy who proposed SMTP over TLS on Port 26 last month. I'm also the guy who attacked (???) John Levine. Today I have something to show you. Long