On Jul 31, 2004, at 5:18 AM, Michel Bouissou wrote:
I'm sure that it's what will happen. Any mail coming out from big
providers or
forwarders will bear a "Resent-From: <MAILER-DAEMON(_at_)big-provider(_dot_)com>"
and
then PRA/Sender-ID will then show completely useless.
I'm not sure if this is meant to be an opinionated assumption or a
statement regarding a flaw in PRA.
If it is a statement regarding a flaw in PRA, please give us the
use/abuse cases and the details.
On the other hand, if you are merely stating an assumption, I do not
think it is very helpful.
On Jul 31, 2004, at 11:59 AM, Douglas Otis wrote:
I meant to say <RFC2822_From : RFC2821_EHLO> could be called Sender-ID.
This would identify the sender with the channel, assuming the EHLO
domain
was authenticated and was authorized. This would stop spoofing,
phishing
and allow accreditation. It would not impact the way mail is used, nor
break anything. Unlike the current definition, this could abate spam.
So do you now believe that a Sender-ID record at EHLO host name is more
desirable than an SRV record?
I'm confused by your suggestion.
-andy