Handling of bad cash

[Linus Nordberg]

nisse@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) wrote
06 Oct 2004 17:35:43 +0200:

|  > The XHASHCASHADVISE extension will then have to move to MAIL FROM.
|  
|  Perhaps it is better to make it a command than a parameter?
|
|  Anyway, it has to include the intended recipient (a little redundant
|  with RCPT) in order to let the server give useful advice.

C: MAIL FROM: <alice@frotz.foo> XHASHCASH-WANNA-PAY-FOR <bob@bletch.bar>
S: 311-Expecting hash cash or authentication with key
   311-<4711>
   311 <1897>
C: XHASHCASHCHALLENGE method-foo,method-bar
S: 250 method-bar hashcash-challenge
C: XHASHCASHRESPONSE method-bar hashcash-response
S: 250 Ok
C: RCPT TO: <bob@bletch.bar>
S: 250 Ok

or, as a separate command

C: MAIL FROM: <alice@frotz.foo>
S: 250 Ok
C: XHASHCASH-HOW-MUCH-IS-A-STAMP-FOR <bob@bletch.bar>
S: 311-Expecting hash cash or authentication with key
   311-<4711>
   311 <1897>
C: XHASHCASHCHALLENGE method-foo,method-bar
S: 250 method-bar hashcash-challenge
C: XHASHCASHRESPONSE method-bar hashcash-response
S: 250 Ok
C: RCPT TO: <bob@bletch.bar>
S: 250 Ok


|  What do you think about a RL (real-life) meeting soon? I think we have

I think that would be good.  Is Stockholm fine with you?  I'm afraid
it can't happen very soon, Stockholm or not. 

Earliest opportunity for me would be daytime next wednesday
(2004-10-13).  Earliest non-daytime would be 18th, 19th or 20th of
October. :(


|  a bunch of issues to discuss, including
|  
|  * protocol details

Have you had any luck finding someone with a bit more knowledge about
SMTP?


|  * forwarding

I guess we'll have to include relaying here as well.


|  * if keys should be per user or per mta.

What are the arguments against per user keys?