nanog mailing list archives
Re: Questions about Internet Packet Losses
From: Avi Freedman <freedman () netaxs com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:17:06 -0500 (EST)
As for the particular fix for SMTP spamming, I would then suggest a priority header. [0 -- reserved] (emergency priority) [1-3 -- private email] [4 -- solicited distribution] (mailing lists, etc) [5 -- unsolicited distribution] (spam)
One comment: A system like this, for both SMTP and HTTP, could help us as a community hugely in the future. (i.e. Self-regulating now). Avi [sorry for continuing the cross-post to nanog on this] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- RE: Questions about Internet Packet Losses, (continued)
- RE: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Peter Cole (Jan 14)
- Re: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Kent W. England (Jan 14)
- Re: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Sean Donelan (Jan 15)
- RE: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Chris A. Icide (Jan 15)
- RE: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Barry Shein (Jan 15)
- Re: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Barry Shein (Jan 15)
- Re: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Matt Ranney (Jan 16)
- Re: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Barry Shein (Jan 16)
- Re: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Matt Ranney (Jan 16)
- RE: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Matthew Gering (Jan 15)
- RE: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Barry Shein (Jan 16)
- Re: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Avi Freedman (Jan 16)
- RE: Questions about Internet Packet Losses Barry Shein (Jan 16)