Subject: Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone?

From: Ravi shankar <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 00:52:58 +0530

@John Levine,

The model is like a simple C/R involving Message ID of a mail. The sending
domain provides the Message ID and allows computational time for the
receiving domain and then query the sending domain to send the message.

Apparently i was not aware of the tumbleweed patent, in which case,
Tumbleweed, can claim this model if implemented as a infringement or
complete violation.

Regards,
Ravi

---

From: John Levine <[email-masked]>
Date: 18 Aug 2009 03:38:01 -0000

>The model is like a simple C/R involving Message ID of a mail. The
>sending domain provides the Message ID and allows computational time
>for the receiving domain and then query the sending domain to send
>the message.

This model has been proposed many, many, times before.  I suppose we should
make a page for it in the ASRG wiki of anti-spam techniques even though it's
more of a mail system redesign than an anti-spam measure.

R's,
John

---

From: Steve Atkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 20:43:13 -0700

> more of a mail system redesign than an anti-spam measure.

If you do, mention RFC 2017.

Cheers,
   Steve

---

From: Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:52:27 +0400

>> more of a mail system redesign than an anti-spam measure.

Agreed; however, I'm out of office this week, and will consider 
doing this only when I'll be back. (As a new entry in 
http://wiki.asrg.sp.am/wiki/Taxonomy_of_anti-spam_techniques#SMTP_techniques 
I suppose).

IMHO, this model --this instance of it-- stems from the common 
qui pro quo generated by speaking of clients (or servers) as if 
they were hosts, rather than processes: Most spam comes from 
clients, I want to eliminate it, hence I will only pull mail 
from servers.

> If you do, mention RFC 2017.

Good point. External-Body resembles "SMTP pull", except for 
implying that the content should be retrieved by the MUA.

RFC 2111's mid URLs could be used to retrieve a message sent by 
SMTP (or stored via IMAP) if access by Message-ID were provided.

In order to infringe the Tumbleweed patent, AFAICS, one 
additionally has to automate checking the log file, as an 
alternative to positive DSNs for the externally stored content.

---

From: Douglas Otis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:10:23 -0700

On 8/17/09 8:43 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
>>> The model is like a simple C/R involving Message ID of a mail.
>>> The sending domain provides the Message ID and allows
>>> computational time for the receiving domain and then query the
>>> sending domain to send the message.
>>
>> This model has been proposed many, many, times before. I suppose we
>> should make a page for it in the ASRG wiki of anti-spam techniques
>> even though it's more of a mail system redesign than an anti-spam
>> measure.
>

Good point since this RFC was adopted in October 1996 and patent 
5,790,790 was filed October 24, 1996 by Jeffry C. Smith of Menlo Park, 
and Jean-Christophe Bandini, of Cupertino. But patent 6,192,407 
describes "private URLS" or PURLS and was filed April 1997.

XAM offers an 80 byte reference that can be made "public" while still 
offer security that does not involve the moving parts found in the '97 
patent.

-Doug