Dave Crocker wrote:
A message that is re-routed by .forward is FROM the original author.
A message re-routed by an MUA is FROM the user of that MUA.
Dave,
I understand the difference. I question the reason for the difference,
given that the current
MTA ".forward" mechanism and aliasing appear to stand in the way of
allowing a
straightforward SPF implementation, particularly because the "original
author" can be foreign to
the MTA doing the forwarding. These problems appear to go away when
"user-initiated" or MUA
forwarding is performed, because the author as specified in the envelope
is then perceived as local
to the MTAs by both them and any foreign MTA which is a target of the
forwarding.
I've gotten some e-mail indicating that because the .forward mechanism
predates RFC-822,
it must be implemented the way it is. I'm not sure I agree with that.
I'd like to see an example
of why the .forward method as now implemented is better than the MUA
method of wrappering
the forwarded materials in another envelope (with "local postage"
applied, so to speak). At the
present time, I don't see any advantage, and at least one disadvantage
(it breaks simple SPF, requiring
a whole 'nuther layer of complexity).
Cheers,
Doug Campbell
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg