ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] 0. General - anti-harvesting (was Inquiry about CallerID Verification)

2003-11-30 23:54:26
On Dec 1, 12:57am, Hector Santos wrote:
} 
} ----- Original Message ----- 
} From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer(_at_)brasslantern(_dot_)com>
} 
} > } I read this to mean that the Return-Path must, if present, be a
} > } valid mailbox for a responsible person (note the MUST).
} >
} > I read this to mean that the server is reqired to insert the return-path
} > field, regardless of its knowledge of the validity of the mailbox.
} 
} hmmm??   It is expected to be VALID!

Again, why?  (Where "this" in "I read this" is the quotation from RFC2821,
now elided, and is not the quotation from ESR that is still included.)

} > Suppose I send a message to you.  For whatever reason, it's queued at
} > my company SMTP server rather than delivered immediately to your MX.
} > While the message is in the queue, I have an argument with my CEO over
} > the interpretation of RFC2821, and he fires me.  The sysadmin immediately
} > disables my email account.
} >
} > You're saying that its now an _SMTP protocol_ violation for the company
} > server to complete the process of delivering that queued message to you?
} >
} 
} Thats not a SMTP problem.

It is, according to what you (and ESR) have claimed.  The address from which
the queued message was sent is no longer valid.  If, as you assert, it is a
MUST requirement of 2821 that the return-path be valid, then any SMTP server
that continues delivery of a queued message for which the sender has since
become invalid, is violating the protocol.

Replace the whole scenario with use of a sneakemail.com address which I
disable while the message is in the queue, if that's a better example.

} Second, as far as SMTP, it is doing what it was technical designed
} done to do - queue for delivery.

Exactly my point.  It's technically impossible for a store-and-forward
system to require that the end points are continuously valid.  Ergo, I
don't believe it's reasonable to interpret the aforementioned section of
RFC2821 the way you say it should be interpreted.

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