grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
I mean ethically someone should do it. But unless a filtering node agrees to forward messages filtered from its own list through its backend and out to all the other nodes for them to make their own choices, there will be holes...
Similarly for carrying all backend received messages. carries posted: yes/no carries backend: yes/no despam mechanism [posted/backend]: describe here moderation [posted/backend]: policy here peers with: who
In CDRv1, all nodes would in principle forward all messages to other nodes, only filtering the feed going to that node's own users according to the local filtering policy. It makes sense to ask nodes to publish details of their local policies. I think personally I would hesitate to peer with any node that didn't forward everything and let me apply my own filter. I assume most other operators would as well, so practically speaking no one would run a node that didn't (claim to) forward everything. Next question: how paranoid are we, i.e., do we attempt to enforce this policy somehow? This goes beyond fault tolerance towards attempting to solve the problem of enforcing peering contracts with untrusted CDRv2 nodes, which is clearly a more... intersting one. I have been busy with real life, and haven't dedicated much more time to thinking about this. I'm hopeful that tomorrow I will have the opportunity to do so at least a little bit. -=rsw