Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
but there is a layer violation issue with MLM's. Unless you have a MLM
is completely purpose-built with SMTP, or has bits and pieces of itself
milter-like parts of the SMTP stream, your average MTA is going to have
no clue whether it's destined for a MLM or anything else.
Those points might well encourage future MLMs to be implemented with
much tighter MTA integration, but if so, we can be sure there
will always be the legacy stuff hanging around as drag.
The legacy system will be there. So you design around it. Its not
really hard. No stats is needed to understand that. All mail vendors
had to deal with the legacy issue for a long time.
Fwiw, we have one of this "Future MLM" since 1996 designed around an
integrated RPC client/server framework. The MLM saves an centralized
"list address acceptance" list file, including subscribe/unsubscribe
list addresses for the SMTP servers to use at the RCPT level.
Hector Santos, CTO
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to