Please do NOT copy me on mail sent to the ASRG list.
Richard Rognlie wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 03:15:26PM -0400, Yakov Shafranovich wrote:
At 11:11 AM 6/29/2003 -0400, Richard Rognlie wrote:
...
Dealing with the return envelope has its own problems (DSN messages with
empty MAIL FROM <>) so it seems that dealing with the HELO/EHLO is better.
BUT, the bottom line is that both proposals are DNS based and propose
additional DNS records. Whether the filtering is done on HELO/EHLO level or
return envelope is something to be left to the implementators. Both
proposals are basically the same - they are mandating DNS records.
Just additional records. Not any additional record types.
And as such, we are not at the mercy of waiting for any particular
flavor of BIND to work its way out into the mainstream.
In comparison to RMX, the records required by DRIP are in the zones that
the domain name owners administrate (or pay someone to administrate);
whereas, the records required by RMX are in the in-addr.arpa, or IPv6
equivalent, which is usually administered by some other entity. RMX
query result can be huge; DRIP query results are small (singe A record).
FWIW, this is part 1 of 2 proposals. Ray (and his hearty band of cohorts)
will be working on the 2nd part [formalizing it] soon. It will be
working on the validity of the headers (not the env-from, but the
*whole* bunch of headers). but I'll leave it's discussion to him.
Actually, it validates the envelope from also.
BTW, Richard is one of the cohorts.
Raymond S Brand
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg