Subject: TMDA Feedback

From: "Fuller, Barbara" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 13:12:44 -0400

Dear IETF Working Group Chairs:

On April 11th, the Secretariat offered you the option of putting TMDA in
front of your working group discussion lists.  For those of you who
"opted in," TMDA has been in place for almost two months, and we are
interested in getting your feedback on how it is working for you.  Have
you experienced any problems or inconvenience as a result of putting
TMDA in front of your lists?  Has doing so saved you time and effort?
Would you recommend "opting in" to those working group chairs that have
not yet done so?  Any feedback that you can provide would be much
appreciated.

Thank you in advance for your input.

Best Regards,

Barbara

---

From: David R Oran <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 13:20:00 -0400

Unqualified success from my point of view. Load dropped to near zero;  
no complaints.

On Jun 6, 2007, at 1:12 PM, Fuller, Barbara wrote:

> On April 11th, the Secretariat offered you the option of putting  
> TMDA in front of your working group discussion lists.  For those of  
> you who “opted in,” TMDA has been in place for almost two months,  
> and we are interested in getting your feedback on how it is working  
> for you.  Have you experienced any problems or inconvenience as a  
> result of putting TMDA in front of your lists?  Has doing so saved  
> you time and effort?  Would you recommend “opting in” to those  
> working group chairs that have not yet done so?  Any feedback that  
> you can provide would be much appreciated.
>

---

From: "Tobias Gondrom" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 19:25:42 +0200

Hello Barbara, 

LTANS "opted in" for the TMDA, and actually I did not feel _any_
difference to before. 

(We did not have Spam problems before neither.)

So no complaints and all fine. 

Thanks, Tobias

________________________________

From: Fuller, Barbara [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 7:13 PM
To: Working Group Chairs
Subject: TMDA Feedback

Best Regards,

Barbara

---

From: David Harrington <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:30:26 -0400

Hi,
 
We use TDMA in the syslog WG, and the number of posts I need to
respond to has dropped significantly. I have had no complaints from WG
members and am unaware of any problmes caused by TDMA.
 
David Harrington
[email-masked]
[email-masked]
[email-masked]
co-chair, Syslog WG

	From: Fuller, Barbara [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 1:13 PM
	To: Working Group Chairs
	Subject: TMDA Feedback

		On April 11th, the Secretariat offered you the option
of putting TMDA in front of your working group discussion lists.  For
those of you who "opted in," TMDA has been in place for almost two
months, and we are interested in getting your feedback on how it is
working for you.  Have you experienced any problems or inconvenience
as a result of putting TMDA in front of your lists?  Has doing so
saved you time and effort?  Would you recommend "opting in" to those
working group chairs that have not yet done so?  Any feedback that you
can provide would be much appreciated.

	Best Regards,

	Barbara

---

From: "John G. Scudder" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 13:31:43 -0400

Same here.  Tons of spam prior to TMDA, only one single spam got  
through afterwards.  No complaints.  Thank you!

--John

On Jun 6, 2007, at 1:20 PM, David R Oran wrote:
> Unqualified success from my point of view. Load dropped to near  
> zero; no complaints.
>
>> TMDA in front of your working group discussion lists.  For those  
>> of you who “opted in,” TMDA has been in place for almost two  
>> months, and we are interested in getting your feedback on how it  
>> is working for you.  Have you experienced any problems or  
>> inconvenience as a result of putting TMDA in front of your lists?   
>> Has doing so saved you time and effort?  Would you recommend  
>> “opting in” to those working group chairs that have not yet done  
>> so?  Any feedback that you can provide would be much appreciated.
>>

---

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 20:25:50 +0200

I am administrating four lists in the OPS area and one WG list. Using
TDMA decreased the spam levels by an amount by 80-90% and I received
zero complaints. 
 
Dan

	From: Fuller, Barbara [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 8:13 PM
	To: Working Group Chairs
	Subject: TMDA Feedback

	On April 11th, the Secretariat offered you the option of putting
TMDA in front of your working group discussion lists.  For those of you
who "opted in," TMDA has been in place for almost two months, and we are
interested in getting your feedback on how it is working for you.  Have
you experienced any problems or inconvenience as a result of putting
TMDA in front of your lists?  Has doing so saved you time and effort?
Would you recommend "opting in" to those working group chairs that have
not yet done so?  Any feedback that you can provide would be much
appreciated.

	Best Regards,

	Barbara

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 00:05:49 -0400

As noted previously, I run 3 WG lists, and have a similar experience to
Dan - spam that I have to deal with in mailman is down by at least 2
orders of magnitude with no complaints from WG members.  The remaining
bounce traffic (spam sent directly to a <list>[email-masked]
<mailto:[email-masked]>  address) is
manageable for now.  This has been a big improvement that has saved me
significant time, effort and annoyance - I would recommend it to other
WG chairs.
 
Thanks,
--David
---------------------------------------------------- 
David L. Black, Senior Technologist 
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748 
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 
[email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 
---------------------------------------------------- 

	From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 2:26 PM
	To: Fuller, Barbara; Working Group Chairs
	Subject: RE: TMDA Feedback

	I am administrating four lists in the OPS area and one WG list.
Using TDMA decreased the spam levels by an amount by 80-90% and I
received zero complaints. 
	 
	Dan

		From: Fuller, Barbara
[mailto:[email-masked]] 
		Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 8:13 PM
		To: Working Group Chairs
		Subject: TMDA Feedback

		On April 11th, the Secretariat offered you the option of
putting TMDA in front of your working group discussion lists.  For those
of you who "opted in," TMDA has been in place for almost two months, and
we are interested in getting your feedback on how it is working for you.
Have you experienced any problems or inconvenience as a result of
putting TMDA in front of your lists?  Has doing so saved you time and
effort?  Would you recommend "opting in" to those working group chairs
that have not yet done so?  Any feedback that you can provide would be
much appreciated.

		Best Regards,

		Barbara

---

From: "DRAGE, Keith \(Keith\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 11:51:07 +0200

>From the SIP WG, so far:
 
No problems experienced and no complaints from the WG.
 
Saved over an hour a week of WG chairs time.
 
regards
 
Keith

	From: Fuller, Barbara [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 6:13 PM
	To: Working Group Chairs
	Subject: TMDA Feedback

	Best Regards,

	Barbara

---

From: Joe Abley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 16:58:21 -0400

> Unqualified success from my point of view. Load dropped to near  

Based on the feedback I have heard so far I am becoming enthusiastic  
about trying it out on the various lists administered by  
[email-masked], too. If I could get a private reminder of the  
mechanics of the TDMA option being offered, that'd be good; April 11  
largely pre-dates my arrival as execd@ and hence I missed the  
original thread on this.

Thanks,

Joe

---

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:42:57 -0500

> you can provide would be much appreciated.
Love it, would marry it if it signed the right prenup. Reduced the  
spam load from thousands of messages every time I look to just a few.

Spam is getting BAD. I brought up a new server the other day and ran  
it for a bit without spamhaus and without greylisting. I was  
averaging 3 spam connections per second in midafternoon.

--
Dean

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:15:13 +0300

For INTAREA: Saved a lot of my time, no complaints
and no inappropriately deleted e-mails (that I know
of, of course).

Jari

---

From: "Fuller, Barbara" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 11:39:16 -0400

Hi Dean:

I'm not sure that I understand your message.  Did you opt in for TMDA
and still have lot of spam?  Do you want to opt in now?  Is this just
FYI?

Thanks

Barbara

-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Willis [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 2:43 AM
To: Fuller, Barbara
Cc: Working Group Chairs
Subject: Re: TMDA Feedback

On Jun 6, 2007, at 12:12 PM, Fuller, Barbara wrote:

> you who "opted in," TMDA has been in place for almost two months,  
> you time and effort?  Would you recommend "opting in" to those  

--
Dean

---

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 20:26:13 -0500

Huh? TMDA is working fine. I couldn't live without it.

I was just complaining about the level of spam on the net in general.  
We made some serious protocol design errors there.

I was refitting the mail server for softarmor.com (which basically  
handles nothing except my personal mail), and noticed a completely  
ridiculous message volume coming just from spam. Without early- 
discard tools like spamhaus' DNSBLs and greylisting, I get more than  
10kbps of spam, sometimes enough to saturate my DSL line. There are  
lessons to be learned here for the IETF. Big, important lessons that  
we aren't paying enough attention to.