Jon Kyme wrote:
http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-sender-rewrite-01.txt
[observations snipped]
The concerns are legitimate and need to be (are being) addressed, however,
"sender rewriting" doesn't seem to require any changes except at providers
of forwarding services, it's completely backwards compatible, as far as I
can tell, and doesn't call for any extensions. It may not be as technically
"neat" as other suggestions, but I'd guess it has a much better chance of
deployment.
Sender rewriting provides a whole new envelope, while Brett's "VIA" would
provide for adding to the envelope.
There are some concerns with the length limits of certain RFC 2822
headers such as "Return Path" which might cause problems with sender
rewriting.
Yakov
-------
Yakov Shafranovich / asrg <at> shaftek.org
SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research <at> solidmatrix.com
"Some lies are easier to believe than the truth" (Dune)
-------
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg