ietf-mxcomp
[Top] [All Lists]

[no subject]

2004-06-18 13:41:06


Reposting as it did not go out to the list

Again as I say/ask this with all respect

Since those maintaining domains and networks know who can send and where it 
should come from, it seems the goal is to set up a mechanism for communicating 
that so others will know it when they receive a message, correct?  The goal is 
to know whether a message did indeed come from that domain, correct? 

Simplistically speaking, since domains/networks know how they are configured, 
why not have a mechanism that can sit on their domain and verify to those 
asking if a message came from their domain or network rather than trying to 
explain their whole setup to everyone?  Likewise for those receiving the 
message have a mechanism that does the same thing in reverse.  (for full 
disclosure this process is also something we have patent claims and working 
code on) That way you don?t have to list all of your users, ips, basically 
diagram your whole network setup to everyone.  

It seems to me that is you make all of your users, specific ips, etc available 
for everyone to see and know more information about upon request, that may lead 
to security problems we haven't even thought of yet, least of which is every 
spammer having the ability to associate an email address with the appropriate 
ip, where as now for mass mailing of spoofs they would have to guess.  Wouldn't 
people rather be able to say "yup, it came from me and that?s all you need to 
know, I'll keep the rest private thank you."? 

Again, this is all spoken with the utmost respect.  

Bill McInnis
Messagelevel.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Kyme [mailto:jrk(_at_)merseymail(_dot_)com] 
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2004 11:23 AM
To: Bill Mcinnis
Cc: ietf-mxcomp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR


Bill Mcinnis wrote:
I think what we are working on falls into the authorization part of
this charter, unless I have that defined wrong. Could someone please 
explain the difference as you all see it just so I am clear.  Again, I 
am trying to find the right place to go with this and keep getting 
shot down.  It is frustrating because while you all are talking about 
getting working code, we already have it.


AFAIK "Message Level Authentication", is concerned with answering "the 
fundamental question plaguing email today: 'Did you really send me this 
email?'", whereas this group has a charter to come up with a mechanism to 
enable "those maintaining domains and networks [...] to specify that individual 
hosts or nodes are authorized to act as MTAs for messages sent from those 
domains or networks"

This difference may be easier to understand if you consider how you'd use 
either system *without* a message in hand:

MARID:
Q.  domain name, IP 
A.  Yes | No

 
Message Level Authentication:
Q. Did you really send me this email?
A. What email? What are you on about? Are you on drugs?


Regards,
JRK





----
This outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by MessageLevel users.
Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.com.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>