On Thursday 08 May 2003 02:59 pm, Vernon Schryver wrote:
That logic is based on the dubious assumption that only maliciousness
can cause bogus sender addresses. Better logic is that mail with bogus
sender addresses cannot be replied to or bounced, and that bogus sender
addresses are often but not always an indication of attempted deceipt.
Of course. How silly of me. Your logic is much superior. What was I
thinking?
The phrase "abuse MX records" is wrong and inappropriate. No "abuse"
is involved.
You're going to have to give stronger evidence than that. MX records are
there to say "this machine accepts e-mail". They have no designed function
to say "this machine sends e-mail". It is telling people to PUSH on a door
that says "PULL". It will work if the door is configured to swing on both
directions but it is not the recommended logical way of doing things.
I understood you to be advocating, no demanding that the sending and
receiving ISP be the same since any other mail is "spoofed." In many
and probably most cases, that restriction is the same as requiring that
sending and receiving MTAs be the same set of machines.
You are confused. I am advocating that the domain administrator (ISP doesn't
matter) be allowed to control which machines may send mail for his domain.
That person can allow any set of machines from a single machine up to the
entire internet to send mail from his domain.
The admins of a domain should be allowed to control their own domain.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg