ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - CRI Draft - 4.1 Loop Avoidance

2003-10-02 10:38:46
That is all a recommendation is..theoretically, if a server is CRI
compliant...the challenge does njot need to go to the sender anyway..so
it doesn't matter who the sender is

-----Original Message-----
From: yshafranovich02(_at_)sprintpcs(_dot_)com
[mailto:yshafranovich02(_at_)sprintpcs(_dot_)com]
On Behalf Of Yakov Shafranovich
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 10:06 PM
To: Eric Dean
Cc: 'Peter Kay'; asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - CRI Draft - 4.1 Loop Avoidance

Can this be left as a recommendation but not required, so the
implementors will be left to decide? Or do we need to make a decision
on
this? Also, would this be relevant to the BCP area?

Eric Dean wrote:
If we start adding various messaging such as with DSNs...I don't
think
that we should be hijacking a sender's email address to carry
various
protocol information.

Of course, that's just my opinion and why it's merely a
recommendation
rather than a must, shall...


-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org 
[mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of

Peter

Kay
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 12:08 PM
To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - CRI Draft - 4.1 Loop Avoidance

I finally had a chance to come up for air to respond to Eric/Yakov's
draft
at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-asrg-cri-00.txt  .
ASRG owes you much for your hard work in creating this document and
I
personally thank you for furthering an important area of
interoperability.

On loop avoidance section, specifically:

"For CRI systems that issue challenge messages, it is also
recommended
that each CRI system use a local systemwide user, such as
cri(_at_)foo(_dot_)com,
for issuing challenges rather than preserving the original sender's
email address as the sender of the challenge message."

We disgree.

Most CR systems automatically/dynamically add the recipient to the
sender's whitelist.  So if I send an email to eric(_at_)cri(_dot_)com, he's
automatically added to my whitelist.  If the mail-from on his

challenge

is eric(_at_)cri(_dot_)com, his email comes straight to my inbox without 
delays

or

filters and certainly won't get challenged.  If the mail-from on his
challenge is "challenger(_at_)cri(_dot_)com", the CRI protocol needs to be

invoked,

possibly creating unecessary overhead.

Keeping the mail-from consistent allows CRI systems to naturally
interoperate and assuming that the CR system adds recipients to the
whitelist, elegantly solves the problem of CR systems challenging

other

challenges.

Peter





_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg




_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg






_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg