Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SpamHaus Behind .mail Top-Level Domain

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the better-mail-for-a-better-tomorrow dept.

securitas writes "The SpamHaus Project is the group pushing ICANN to create a new trusted-sender system and the .mail top-level domain. SpamHaus proposes that registrants under the .mail TLD would pay at least $2000 per year to and 'agree to abide by certain anti-spam mailing practices.' The interesting twist is that companies that comply with the US CAN-SPAM act - which SpamHaus opposed due to the legalization of bulk unsolicited commercial e-mail - would not be eligibile to register a .mail address. The .mail TLD proposal was recently discussed on Slashdot."

7 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe a Good Thing? by Liselle · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I never get to be the one who says "but wait, this is a GOOD thing", so I'll toss it out there now, flamebait be darned.

    The interesting twist is that companies that comply with the US CAN-SPAM act - which SpamHaus opposed due to the legalization of bulk unsolicited commercial e-mail - would not be eligibile to register a .mail address.
    This could probably be worded a little more clearly. Complying with the CAN-SPAM act is as easy as not doing anything at all. I think what the submitter means, correct me if I'm wrong, is the "one-shot" bulk mail that a company is allowed to send you under CAN-SPAM. Obviously, SpamHaus considers this spam, still, even though it's technically legal (I would tend to agree).

    This new TLD proposal, according to their FAQ, is not aimed at stopping spam, or replacing the email infrastructure from the ground up. It's more towards legitimizing non-spam email. It may not be technically possible (not my area of expertise, I remember some nay-sayers in the last article discussion who at least sounded like they knew what they were talking about), but I still think their hearts are in the right place. Am I wrong?

    I'm looking forward to the whitepaper they've promised on it.
    --
    Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
    1. Re:Maybe a Good Thing? by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When big isps only accept mail from servers registered in the .mail tld, then that takes away my ability to run my own mailserver for my own private domains. How do you mean nothing is taken away from the end user.

  2. Just cut to the chase by siliconbunny · · Score: 5, Funny

    Set up a .spam level, and we can block everything from that if we want.

  3. So basically, this is a $2000 whitelist. by Bombcar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Because the cost of entry is high, and perhaps policed, it basically becomes a way of saying, "It's from a .mail domain, so it must NOT be spam."

    Whatever. Just like many whitelist methods, it has the standard flaws.

    But I guess it couldn't hurt! Companies with the big bucks or with donors (I'm thinking Samba mailing lists, etc), could afford it.

    The rest of us slobs would continue to crawl around in the .com, .net, .org, and .dust domains.

    As an aside, could you have the same problem with this domain as with AOL's spam filtering, i.e., false reports? What are the punishments for violating the rules of the .mail domain? Death?

    --
    Fellowship 9/11
  4. Yeah But... by aduzik · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Spammers are a crafty bunch. They've defeated just about every mechnaism for preventing unauthorized mail server use/relaying/etc. How long until they find a way to get their own .mail server? And also, I would venture to say that most legitimate orgs -- small businesses, personal web site owners, and non-profit organizations in particular -- will not want to, nor be able to shell out two grand for YAD (yet another domain).

    I think recent innovations -- SPF being my favorite so far -- offer a lot more promise than a new TLD. But that's just me :-)

    --
    If it's not one thing it's your mother.
  5. Re:Goodby home mail server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I certainly can't pay $2000 a year.

    Nor can a lot of people, which is why this propsal will never work.

  6. $2000/year would ruin free email by TheChucklesStart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do you think that Yahoo! or Microsoft's Hotmail would pay that $2,000 just so people could send email from them. Would smaller free e-mail companies even be able to afford it?

    Even if those free email places did pay for a .mail domain, would that stop spam? How much spam do you get already that comes from Yahoo! or Hotmail or some other free email survice.

    This would either get rid of free email or let spam live, both while closing down the small free email services. I don't like either option, we should do something else.