Re: Proposed EU Directive on Electronic Commerce

• To: Piet Beertema < >
• From: Ragnar Lonn < >
• Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:44:36 +0100 (MET)
• Cc: Ulf Vedenbrant < >

On Fri, 15 Jan 1999, Piet Beertema wrote:

>     For example
>     
>     uce-spam-uce should be added to the sending address
>     <uffe.uce-spam-uce@localhost
> Unlikely. That would cause zillions of problems.
>     
>     or a new top level domain... .spam or .uce
>     uffe@localhost
> Possible. Routing might be a problem though.
> 

Maybe it'd be possible to require mailers to declare that they're
going to transmit UCE in the HELO statement? 
Like "HELO mail.swip.net.uce"?  

The servers would have to separate UCE and non-UCE mail into two
batches and send them individually so it's slightly more costly
to propagate the mail that way, of course, but it'd be easy for
the receiving server. Especially if it didn't tolerate UCE at all,
in which case it could just respond 5xx to the HELO statement.

  /Ragnar

• Post To The List:

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Proposed EU Directive on Electronic Commerce
    • From: Ulf Vedenbrant

• References:
  • Re: Proposed EU Directive on Electronic Commerce
    • From: Piet Beertema