Chris Lewis schrieb:
1) The spam filtering engines
2) The sendmail perimeter array
3) The Exchange cloud
4) The mailbox server
2-4 aren't connected to the Internet, and we don't want them to be for
security reasons.
(1) is effectively not a store-and-forward MTA to (2) (it's analogous to
a packet relay). Secondly, we may be eliminating (2) in the
not-to-distant future. However, we still don't want anything but (1)
directly connected to the Internet. An HTTP-style redirect won't work.
If I understand Jose-Marcio corretly, that's not where "303 FORWARD
somepath(_at_)domain(_dot_)com" would come into the picture.
I guess the basic idea is for cases where it is feasible and practical
for the (intermediate) destination server to tell the sending server to
deliver the message to somewhere else.
Such a step would eliminate a number of potential forwarding issues (eg
that the forwarding target server may/should identify the forwarding
server as a legitimate forwarder and not as a spam source per se).
However I'm not sure that there would be sufficiently broad usage that
it would gain sufficient attraction and adoption, but it could be an
interesting SMTP extension, especially for sites with a large forwarding
user base (like Google etc).
-- Matthias
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg