On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Douglas Campbell wrote:
Probably nobody expected in 1989 (when 1123 was published)
that today most mails are spam with forged Return-Paths. Or
maybe they thought that "MX" should cover the concept "RMX",
some kind of default "v=spf1 mx a ~all".
It's a subtle bug, all reasons given in RfC 1123 for dropping
the source routes are convincing. Only the side-effect "this
allows to use arbitrary Return-Paths" turned out to be very
bad, more than a decade later.
Can you be more specific about where the reasons are given? I can
find MUST and SHOULD - no rationale. Was that given elsewhere?
Bye, Frank
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg