On Fri March 4 2005 10:50, wayne wrote:
In <200503040820(_dot_)22493(_dot_)blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> Bruce Lilly
<blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> writes:
From my perspective (as a mobile
user (i.e. connecting via an unpredictable IP address) with need
to use only a few domain names) I'd phrase the issue as "being
able to use any IP address"; and that's where SPF utterly fails.
I don't believe that SPF utterly fails for roaming users. There are
many options for you to use.
For example, you can use SMTP AUTH over the SMTP submission port to
always submit your email to an acceptable MSA instead of using your
ISP's MTA.
Which MSA? operated by whom? Using AUTH based on what prearranged
information?
Another option is to give neutral results on other IP addresses. You
can even do something like:
v=spf1 mx -exists:%{ir}.xbl.spamhaus.org ?all
No, I can't, because I don't own my ISP's domain name (which
appears as the domain of my mailbox).
you can use pretty aggressive DNSBLs with out fear of
the domain's MTA being listed on the DNSBLs.
No, same reason as above.
With more work, you can create specialized DNS servers and use the
exists: mechanism to do some fancy things. About a year ago, someone
created a "rate limiting" DNS server, so you could do something like:
Again no and no; same reason.
Similar techniques can be used check for a special token in the return
path and allow email using it.
Most UAs set the SMTP return path using the sender's mailbox;
there's no "special token" there.
One person was working on creating
something similar to SMTP-after-POP, which would authorize an IP
address via a specialized DNS server after a POP.
Sending and retrieving are separate operations; many ISPs
provide separate servers. Moreover, it is sometimes necessary
to send mail w/o using the ISP's SMTP relay, for example to
work around temporary DNS botches [which is why blocking port
25 is unreasonable].
All of these techniques have been known/discussed for well over a
year.
And (as has also been discussed/is well known) none of them
are applicable in the vast majority of cases (i.e. in general).