Subject: [Asrg] ITU asks IETF question about spam

From: "william(at)elan.net" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:14:05 -0800 (PST)

Some of you may have missed this ITU "liaison statement" to IETF:
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file200.pdf
which is "Question: Study on countering SPAM by technical means""

[apparently nobody told ITU that SPAM (uppercase) is trademark of Hormel]

There appears to be a deadline of March 2006 for IETF to respond
to that request. I wonder if anybody is working on such a response
and in general how IETF is going to go about it (i.e. I would expect
it to ask its group(s) that work on the topic in question, which the 
closest one seems to be ASRG...

-----

BTW - I also seem to have some problem with grammatic text of their
request, for example the text says
  "Spam may include delivery of phishing and spyware"
but to me phishing is an activity (noun form of verb) where as spyware
is proper object noun. Spam also seems to be an object, but I've seen
it sometimes used to represent activity and I'm not entirely sure if
that is right usage or if using 'spamming' would be more appropriate
(to me 'spamming' seems right one to use). For original text the correct 
comparison should have been between similar types i.e. "spamming" to 
phishing and to "delivery of spyware" (also an activity), i.e. something 
like this seems more appropriate grammatically:
  "Spamming may include phishing and delivery of spyware."
Or possibly comparison only between objects:
  "Spam may include phishing emails and spyware"

Am I correct in my assessment of above as being grammatic error (and 
which one of my corrections is more appropriate BTW)? If so I wonder
who wrote their text because I see several other similar errors and
as well as some technical ones too.

-- 
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
[email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg