I wish we could focus on the areas where we agree - e.g. that 2822
checks could be useful, and how to do them so that they are, and have
minimized drawbacks. It's not like we have an I-D we're ready to submit
if it weren't for the issue of whether to check headers.
On 3/29/04 9:22 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip sent forth electrons to convey:
My view is that if we do not mention RFC822 checks at all then
what will happen is a whole rash of ad-hoc schemes will be tried
with varying effectiveness. We will end up with the uncertainty
that you are concerned about.
A particularly good point in that email. (We don't want anyone coding
anything like if From: != MAIL FROM, trash it, period.
Let's get something good out before the lousy stuff becomes any more
popular.
On 4/1/04 11:21 AM, Hector Santos sent forth electrons to convey:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Elvey" <matthew(_at_)elvey(_dot_)com>
2)I don't think most share your opinion that all email that isn't
strictly SMTP compliant can be safely refused without refusing email
wanted by the intended recipient. Your system's refusal of emails from
me for reasons I don't understand come to mind.
Matthew, that was 1 time in what? NOVEMBER and YOU still saying this 3-4
months later? You continue to repeat this all over the net. I asked you to
prove it showing logs and refused to do so.
That's not quite true. I emailed you a bounce (with full headers and
body showing your server refusing and why) - all the info you need to
see what's in your log, and told you I didn't have the actual log, which
wouldn't have shown anything more useful anyway. I received no reply,
even though the above statement shows you got the email. Perhaps you
don't know the meaning of the word refuse.
Further discussion off-list, *please*. I will not respond to further
comments on this on-list. Apologies for this OT post.