I dispute that the existing protocol supports Hector's position. As I
said in another message, I also dispute that VRFY can be adapted for this
purpose in any useful way.
I already proved that it works. You have not shown that it does not work.
You all said talked about is scalability issues and FALSE positives.
I already said that the method can not do anything against false positives.
But as my statistics have shown over 80% of the abuse are from GHOST
systems!
That is a DRASTIC reduction in illegal access.
You now also question whether a return path is not required to be VALID???
Is that a question view of your thinking?
A Return Path MUST be valid in order to get a MAIL SYSTEM to bounce
mechanism work. If you are too assume that a RETURN PATH is not to be
relied on, than we must as well throw out all the RFC dealing with DSN and
bouncing.
Again, that has nothing to do with the "real" possibility that it is NOT
valid. The spammers have proven that.
---
Hector Santos, CTO
WINSERVER "Wildcat! Interactive Net Server"
support: http://www.winserver.com
sales: http://www.santronics.com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg