On Jan 8, 2005, at 13:40, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2005-01-08 12:36:23 -0500, Seth Breidbart wrote:
Ken Raeburn <raeburn(_at_)raeburn(_dot_)org> wrote:
Will that work in a world that still has a lot of mailing lists that
don't rewrite the envelope sender data, such that bounces go back to
the sender but from addresses the sender didn't send to?
That one I don't consider a problem; if you subscribe to a mailing
list and I post to the list, I _don't_ want to see anything automatic
from you.
I think he means it the other way around: Every time you post
something to a mailinglist, you get a lot of challenges because your
address isn't in the whitelist.
I meant both, actually. :-)
More to the point, I wanted to know what Michael Kaplan thought about
the various situations:
1) Sender isn't filtering bounces but multiple list members are using
his system and thus issue challenges.
2) Sender is filtering bounces (either approach that's been discussed
-- discard all bounces generated by this system because you object to
it, or look for recognized addresses as the bounce sender), and
multiple list members are using his system
3) Sender is filtering bounces, and the original recipient address is a
simple mail forwarding service, with the final destination running his
system
I've deleted the email with the URL, and it's out of my browser's
history now, but I don't recall the proposal addressing these points
from my earlier reading.
I'd be kind of disappointed if his answer turns out to be the same as
for SPF (i.e., don't forward without rewriting the envelope), but
offhand I don't see what else would work without losing a lot of mail,
which I would consider unacceptable.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg