Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> wrote:
Because the behaviour of the network (machines originating mail)
does not match the intended behaviour. This isn't hard to see.
*whose* intended behavior? it certainly matches the sender's intended
behavior. and it's perfectly legal according to the standards, with
good reason.
Can I cry now? Are you even reading what I write?
My example involved a machine which was NOT intended to originate
SMTP. Due to misconfiguration/bugs, it does. The machine
administrator never intended the spammer to be able to send spam
through that machine. Yet the spammer can do so. This is a problem
for everybody but the spammer.
I don't *care* about the intended behaviour of the spammer. They're
abusing systems they were never intended to have access to. That
abuse is causing other people problems.
people need to be able to send mail from arbitrary locations on the
net.
Why? Are there NO solutions to the roaming problem, other than
allowing any IP on the net to originate SMTP to any other IP, and
claim to be from any domain?
I believe that such solutions exist. They should be used. I
believe that using them will help minimize the spam problem.
this mail is originating from some earthlink.net IP address; the return
address is moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu(_dot_) it's perfectly valid
for me to be using that
return address to send mail from that IP, or from any other IP that my laptop
happens to be connected to.
Why? You're stating it like it's an axiom, or a law of nature.
Is it really impossible for you to connect to a well-known SMTP
server, which can verify you, and verify itself as a well-known SMTP
server to others? Do you understand why such behaviour will make it
orders of magnitude easier for other SMTP servers to "qualify" SMTP
sources, and to filter out spam?
Alan DeKok.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg