----- Original Message -----
From: "Hector Santos" <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 2:27 PM
Subject: Re: Sender's Declaration of Identity
Example #9
C: EHLO mailserver7.bigforwarder.com
S: 250-hostdomain.com, Please to meet you.
S: 250-ID SPF1-REQ SPF2 CSV-AUTO
S: 250 HELP
[CVS checking done]
S: 551 - Sorry, you are not validated
etc. etc.
This CSV example would be incorrect.
However, the main reason to follow up on this example is that you will be in
conflict with Dave's CSV proposal .
Of course, this presumes you like the idea of modifiers:
So for example #9.1:
C: EHLO mailserver7.bigforwarder.com
S: 250-hostdomain.com, Please to meet you.
S: 250-ID SPF1-RES SPF2 CSV-AUTO
S: 250 HELP
Here we have a system that will automatically apply CSV. But it is a
chicken and egg situation when it comes to CSV.
Since Dave has not cleanly defines how CSV should be done, the default mode
would be to immediately apply the checking:
C: EHLO mailserver7.bigforwarder.com
[CSV checking]
S: 551 - Sorry, you are not validated
So for your proposal to support CSV, you will have update Dave's
specification to include a delayed verification conception that would be
applied at or before MAIL FROM:
C: EHLO mailserver7.bigforwarder.com
S: 250-hostdomain.com, Please to meet you.
S: 250-ID SPF1-RES SPF2 CSV-AUTO
S: 250 HELP
C: MAIL FROM <reverse path>
[CSV checking]
S: 551 - Sorry, you are not CSV validated at the EHLO domain/ip.
So in my opinion, your proposal benefits the CSV proposals or show it can't
be use in AUTO mode but instead in REQ or RES mode:
C: EHLO mailserver7.bigforwarder.com
S: 250-hostdomain.com, Please to meet you.
S: 250-ID SPF1-RES SPF2 CSV-AUTO
S: 250 HELP
ID SPF1 domain.com
[CSV checking]
S: 551 - Sorry, you are not CSV validated at the EHLO domain/ip.
Of course, Dave will probably disagree. I just illustrating how your
proposal may conflict with it.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com