----- Original Message -----
From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer(_at_)brasslantern(_dot_)com>
To: <asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 4:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - anti-harvesting (was Inquiry about CallerID
Verification)
} RFC2821 says the Return-Path has to be the same address that was
} presented to the MAIL command.
So what? MX1 isn't any party to the protocol exchange between MTA1 and
MX2. The reverse-path is completely valid as far as MTA1 can tell; if
MX2 responds 5xx, MTA1 will do the right thing. You still haven't shown
me how or why any of this affects what happens if MX1 becomes party to
a separate SMTP transaction initiated by MX2, whether involving the same
or any other mailbox.
Doesn't apply.
Your example is akin to a user with an address maintained by an ISP. In
general, the user will use his ISP server to send mail.
But you said, he will do peer to peer and send directly using his OWN send
software.
The same applies since he is using his ISP ADDRESS, the validation still
takes place at his ISP site.
---
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